There are some format problems with the chatlog. Please correct them and reload this page. They are labeled on this page in a red box, like this message.
It may be helpful to
08:07:28 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc
RRSAgent IRC Bot: logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc ←
08:07:29 <trackbot> RRSAgent, make logs world
Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, make logs world ←
08:07:31 <trackbot> Zakim, this will be GLD
Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, this will be GLD ←
08:07:31 <Zakim> ok, trackbot, I see T&S_(GLD)3:00AM already started
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, trackbot, I see T&S_(GLD)3:00AM already started ←
08:07:32 <trackbot> Meeting: Government Linked Data Working Group Teleconference
08:07:32 <trackbot> Date: 12 April 2013
08:08:18 <bhyland> zakim, who is on the phone?
Bernadette Hyland: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
08:08:18 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
08:08:38 <MakxDekkers> shall we disconnect and try again?
Makx Dekkers: shall we disconnect and try again? ←
08:08:44 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
08:08:44 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
08:09:07 <martinA> zakim, code?
Martín Álvarez: zakim, code? ←
08:09:07 <Zakim> the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), martinA
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), martinA ←
08:09:37 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
08:09:37 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
08:09:57 <bhyland> Success!
Bernadette Hyland: Success! ←
08:10:03 <bhyland> or not ...
Bernadette Hyland: or not ... ←
08:10:31 <MakxDekkers> I am back in and can hear you
Makx Dekkers: I am back in and can hear you ←
08:11:32 <bhyland> zakim, who is on the call?
Bernadette Hyland: zakim, who is on the call? ←
08:11:32 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
08:12:03 <bhyland> zakim bye
Bernadette Hyland: zakim bye ←
08:12:13 <bhyland> zakim you're dismissed
Bernadette Hyland: zakim you're dismissed ←
08:12:19 <martinA> :-)
Martín Álvarez: :-) ←
08:12:26 <bhyland> zakim, bye
Bernadette Hyland: zakim, bye ←
08:12:50 <bhyland> zakim, who is on the call?
Bernadette Hyland: zakim, who is on the call? ←
08:12:51 <Zakim> sorry, bhyland, I don't know what conference this is
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, bhyland, I don't know what conference this is ←
08:12:51 <Zakim> On IRC I see cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot ←
08:12:57 <HadleyBeeman> zakim, what conferences do you see?
Hadley Beeman: zakim, what conferences do you see? ←
08:12:58 <Zakim> I see T&S_(GLD)3:00AM active and no others scheduled to start in the next 15 minutes
Zakim IRC Bot: I see T&S_(GLD)3:00AM active and no others scheduled to start in the next 15 minutes ←
08:13:09 <MakxDekkers> retrying...
Makx Dekkers: retrying... ←
08:13:12 <cygri> zakim, this is GLD
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, this is GLD ←
08:13:12 <Zakim> ok, cygri; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, cygri; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM ←
08:13:23 <cygri> zakim, who is on the phone?
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, who is on the phone? ←
08:13:23 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
08:13:32 <cygri> zakim, code?
Richard Cyganiak: zakim, code? ←
08:13:32 <Zakim> the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), cygri
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), cygri ←
08:13:35 <HadleyBeeman> zakim, move GLD to here
Hadley Beeman: zakim, move GLD to here ←
08:13:35 <Zakim> HadleyBeeman, this was already T&S_(GLD)3:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: HadleyBeeman, this was already T&S_(GLD)3:00AM ←
08:13:36 <Zakim> ok, HadleyBeeman; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, HadleyBeeman; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM ←
08:13:57 <HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot
Hadley Beeman: http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot ←
08:14:01 <MakxDekkers> baxk in
Makx Dekkers: baxk in ←
08:14:29 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
08:14:29 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
08:14:57 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
08:14:57 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
08:15:11 <HadleyBeeman> zakim, who is on the call?
Hadley Beeman: zakim, who is on the call? ←
08:15:11 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
08:15:28 <HadleyBeeman> phila has arrived - we're saved!
Hadley Beeman: phila has arrived - we're saved! ←
08:15:28 <MakxDekkers> calling back in...
Makx Dekkers: calling back in... ←
08:16:13 <MakxDekkers> here again on phone
Makx Dekkers: here again on phone ←
08:16:56 <MakxDekkers> disconnecting now
Makx Dekkers: disconnecting now ←
08:17:12 <PhilA> zakim, code?
Phil Archer: zakim, code? ←
08:17:12 <Zakim> the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), PhilA
Zakim IRC Bot: the conference code is 4531 (tel:+1.617.761.6200 sip:zakim@voip.w3.org), PhilA ←
08:17:20 <PhilA> zakim, who is here?
Phil Archer: zakim, who is here? ←
08:17:20 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
08:17:21 <Zakim> On IRC I see PhilA, Zakim, cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see PhilA, Zakim, cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot ←
08:17:34 <PhilA> zakim, bye
Phil Archer: zakim, bye ←
08:17:36 <MakxDekkers> yes that was what i used, same as yesterday
Makx Dekkers: yes that was what i used, same as yesterday ←
08:17:40 <PhilA> zakim, this gld
Phil Archer: zakim, this gld ←
08:17:56 <PhilA> zakim, this is gld
Phil Archer: zakim, this is gld ←
08:17:56 <Zakim> ok, PhilA; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, PhilA; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM ←
08:18:05 <PhilA> zakim, who is here?
Phil Archer: zakim, who is here? ←
08:18:05 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
08:18:07 <Zakim> On IRC I see PhilA, cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot
Zakim IRC Bot: On IRC I see PhilA, cygri, fadmaa, martinA, RRSAgent, HadleyBeeman, bhyland, BartvanLeeuwen, MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, sandro, trackbot ←
08:18:20 <MakxDekkers> calling in...
Makx Dekkers: calling in... ←
08:18:44 <PhilA> rrsagent, make logs public
Phil Archer: rrsagent, make logs public ←
08:18:59 <MakxDekkers> call connected
Makx Dekkers: call connected ←
08:19:13 <MakxDekkers> yes i can hear you
Makx Dekkers: yes i can hear you ←
08:19:38 <PhilA> zakim, present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA
Phil Archer: zakim, present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA ←
08:19:38 <Zakim> I don't understand you, PhilA
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand you, PhilA ←
08:19:49 <PhilA> rrsagent, present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA
Phil Archer: rrsagent, present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA ←
08:19:49 <RRSAgent> I'm logging. I don't understand 'present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA', PhilA. Try /msg RRSAgent help
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I'm logging. I don't understand 'present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA', PhilA. Try /msg RRSAgent help ←
08:19:55 <HadleyBeeman> Day 2 agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/F2F3
Hadley Beeman: Day 2 agenda: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/F2F3 ←
08:19:56 <cygri> present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA
Richard Cyganiak: present+ MakxDekkers, DaveReynolds, martinA ←
08:23:37 <MakxDekkers> I am going to sign off at lunchtime today
Makx Dekkers: I am going to sign off at lunchtime today ←
08:24:07 <DaveReynolds> Possible also delay CR exit until sandro is here, I know he has views on that
Dave Reynolds: Possible also delay CR exit until sandro is here, I know he has views on that ←
08:25:21 <DaveReynolds> No thanks
Dave Reynolds: No thanks ←
08:25:36 <PhilA> q+
Phil Archer: q+ ←
08:25:43 <PhilA> q-
Phil Archer: q- ←
08:27:32 <MakxDekkers> i am very slow line so won't be able to do visual
Makx Dekkers: i am very slow line so won't be able to do visual ←
08:27:39 <martinA> thanks
Martín Álvarez: thanks ←
08:27:48 <bhyland> Ok, Deirdre is setting it up now ...
Bernadette Hyland: Ok, Deirdre is setting it up now ... ←
08:29:05 <PhilA> ADMS editor's draft is at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/adms/index.html
Phil Archer: ADMS editor's draft is at https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/gld/raw-file/default/adms/index.html ←
08:29:20 <cygri> scribe: Richard
(Scribe set to Richard Cyganiak)
08:29:43 <cygri> topic: ADMS
08:36:47 <DaveReynolds> One of the changes is the merge the advice for spatial and non-spatial objects.
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Dave Reynolds: One of the changes is the merge the advice for spatial and non-spatial objects. ←
08:37:05 <cygri> (scribe forgot that he's supposed to scribe)
(scribe forgot that he's supposed to scribe) ←
08:37:06 <DaveReynolds> And SO will become information objects which affects http-range-14
Dave Reynolds: And SO will become information objects which affects http-range-14 ←
08:37:20 <cygri> PhilA: Could make ADMS a DCAT profile
Phil Archer: Could make ADMS a DCAT profile ←
08:37:36 <cygri> …Yesterday's discussion is relevant to that, and it would work with what we resolved yesterday
…Yesterday's discussion is relevant to that, and it would work with what we resolved yesterday ←
08:38:02 <cygri> … Clean and easy to say that SemanticAsset is a subclass of Dataset
… Clean and easy to say that SemanticAsset is a subclass of Dataset ←
08:38:03 <cygri> q+
q+ ←
08:38:35 <cygri> … I'm not sure we need arms:distribution property, could just use dcat:distribution
… I'm not sure we need adms:distribution property, could just use dcat:distribution ←
08:38:43 <cygri> s/arms/adms/
08:38:50 <cygri> … We have more properties than DCAT
… We have more properties than DCAT ←
08:39:07 <cygri> … But there are very few terms that aren't either DCAT or DC Terms
… But there are very few terms that aren't either DCAT or DC Terms ←
08:39:22 <cygri> bhyland: Then why does it look so complicated?
Bernadette Hyland: Then why does it look so complicated? ←
08:39:41 <cygri> PhilA: More detail.
Phil Archer: More detail. ←
08:40:18 <cygri> … adms:Identifier is perhaps the most significant addition
… adms:Identifier is perhaps the most significant addition ←
08:40:33 <cygri> … Is a bit like SKOS-XL but not quite
… Is a bit like SKOS-XL but not quite ←
08:40:42 <cygri> … Allows making statements about identifiers
… Allows making statements about identifiers ←
08:41:09 <cygri> … Useful in RegOrg as well
… Useful in RegOrg as well ←
08:41:44 <cygri> … Different from Org where classification is done via skos:notation
… Different from Org where classification is done via skos:notation ←
08:42:05 <cygri> fadmaa: One of the DCAT comments was about providing a contact point
Fadi Maali: One of the DCAT comments was about providing a contact point ←
08:42:25 <cygri> PhilA: ADMS has contactPoint which is a VCard
Phil Archer: ADMS has contactPoint which is a VCard ←
08:44:10 <cygri> fadmaa: We will probably add something for this to DCAT
Fadi Maali: We will probably add something for this to DCAT ←
08:44:16 <cygri> … Not yet sure what namespace
… Not yet sure what namespace ←
08:44:38 <cygri> PhilA: If you make dcat:contactPoint, we'd use that in ADMS
Phil Archer: If you make dcat:contactPoint, we'd use that in ADMS ←
08:45:12 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
08:45:12 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
08:45:25 <cygri> … adms:Item is an item included in the asset
… adms:Item is an item included in the asset ←
08:45:36 <bhyland> zakim, who is on the call
Bernadette Hyland: zakim, who is on the call ←
08:45:36 <Zakim> I don't understand 'who is on the call', bhyland
Zakim IRC Bot: I don't understand 'who is on the call', bhyland ←
08:45:38 <PhilA> zakim, who is on the call?
Phil Archer: zakim, who is on the call? ←
08:45:38 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
08:46:05 <MakxDekkers> did the call drop? i am out, calling in again
Makx Dekkers: did the call drop? i am out, calling in again ←
08:46:21 <bhyland> yes, the phone line dropped & we dialed back in again...
Bernadette Hyland: yes, the phone line dropped & we dialed back in again... ←
08:46:49 <MakxDekkers> ok back in again
Makx Dekkers: ok back in again ←
08:48:13 <cygri> cygri: Instead of dcterms:hasPart, would make sense to use dcat:dataset or a subproperty
Richard Cyganiak: Instead of dcterms:hasPart, would make sense to use dcat:dataset or a subproperty ←
08:48:57 <DaveReynolds> q?
Dave Reynolds: q? ←
08:49:00 <DaveReynolds> a+
Dave Reynolds: a+ ←
08:49:03 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
08:49:05 <cygri> PhilA: We also have versioning between assets, xhv:next, prev, last
Phil Archer: We also have versioning between assets, xhv:next, prev, last ←
08:49:35 <fadmaa> q+
Fadi Maali: q+ ←
08:57:39 <fadmaa> cygri: I don't see clear usecase for the includedItem property in ADMS seams to
(No events recorded for 8 minutes)
Richard Cyganiak: I don't see clear usecase for the includedItem property in ADMS seams to [ Scribe Assist by Fadi Maali ] ←
08:58:02 <fadmaa> ... It'd be helpful to know what usecases need this property
Fadi Maali: ... It'd be helpful to know what usecases need this property ←
08:58:26 <fadmaa> MakxDekkers: many involved stakeholders expressed their need for such a property
Makx Dekkers: many involved stakeholders expressed their need for such a property [ Scribe Assist by Fadi Maali ] ←
08:58:45 <PhilA> ack cygri
Phil Archer: ack cygri ←
08:58:49 <PhilA> ack DaveReynolds
Phil Archer: ack DaveReynolds ←
08:59:04 <cygri> cygri: I don't understand why adms:Item is needed. The use cases mentioned can be addressed by SKOS.
Richard Cyganiak: I don't understand why adms:Item is needed. The use cases mentioned can be addressed by SKOS. ←
08:59:07 <fadmaa> ... I can't think of a specific usecase other than items in a codelist now
Fadi Maali: ... I can't think of a specific usecase other than items in a codelist now ←
08:59:47 <cygri> DaveReynolds: Looks like you want to use SemanticAsset as a container and you want to talk about the items. LDP is relevant here, it has a container notion
Dave Reynolds: Looks like you want to use SemanticAsset as a container and you want to talk about the items. LDP is relevant here, it has a container notion ←
09:00:33 <cygri> ACTION: MakxDekkers to describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container
ACTION: MakxDekkers to describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container ←
09:00:33 <trackbot> Error finding 'MakxDekkers'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/users>.
Trackbot IRC Bot: Error finding 'MakxDekkers'. You can review and register nicknames at <http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/track/users>. ←
09:00:57 <cygri> ACTION: Makx to describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container
ACTION: Makx to describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container ←
09:00:57 <trackbot> Created ACTION-115 - Describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container [on Makx Dekkers - due 2013-04-19].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-115 - Describe use case for adms:Item and look into ldp:Container [on Makx Dekkers - due 2013-04-19]. ←
09:02:03 <cygri> DaveReynolds: Can't you use dcterms:hasVersion instead of the xhv properties?
Dave Reynolds: Can't you use dcterms:hasVersion instead of the xhv properties? ←
09:02:55 <cygri> MakxDekkers: There doesn't seem to be a standard way of doing versioning
Makx Dekkers: There doesn't seem to be a standard way of doing versioning ←
09:03:21 <cygri> … dcterms:hasVersion doesn't give you a sequence
… dcterms:hasVersion doesn't give you a sequence ←
09:03:47 <cygri> … You could have a network of versions related to each other
… You could have a network of versions related to each other ←
09:04:09 <cygri> … Also a way of pointing to the last version is important
… Also a way of pointing to the last version is important ←
09:04:21 <cygri> … Didn't see anything in DC Terms that works for this
… Didn't see anything in DC Terms that works for this ←
09:04:58 <cygri> DaveReynolds: Two notions being mixed here. There are versions, and then there are sequences.
Dave Reynolds: Two notions being mixed here. There are versions, and then there are sequences. ←
09:05:15 <cygri> … XHV not necessarily a sequence of versions, could be a sequence of other things
… XHV not necessarily a sequence of versions, could be a sequence of other things ←
09:05:59 <cygri> … Using DC Terms to say there are multiple versions, and then relating them with prev/next, would make sense
… Using DC Terms to say there are multiple versions, and then relating them with prev/next, would make sense ←
09:06:15 <cygri> PhilA: Would a subproperty of prev/next work?
Phil Archer: Would a subproperty of prev/next work? ←
09:06:21 <cygri> DaveReynolds: Yes.
Dave Reynolds: Yes. ←
09:07:12 <cygri> … With DC Terms you can say here's an abstract concept, and then there are specific versions of that
… With DC Terms you can say here's an abstract concept, and then there are specific versions of that ←
09:07:37 <cygri> q+
q+ ←
09:09:19 <DaveReynolds> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/ is the generic asset, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/ is a specific version
Dave Reynolds: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/ is the generic asset, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/ is a specific version ←
09:09:28 <DaveReynolds> maybe :)
Dave Reynolds: maybe :) ←
09:12:29 <cygri> cygri: For a generic versioning mechanism, it would be good to have a way of talking about the abstract, unversioned thing
Richard Cyganiak: For a generic versioning mechanism, it would be good to have a way of talking about the abstract, unversioned thing ←
09:12:38 <cygri> MakxDekkers: ADMS doesn't do that
Makx Dekkers: ADMS doesn't do that ←
09:13:42 <cygri> … next/prev can be used for things like next chapter
… next/prev can be used for things like next chapter ←
09:13:53 <cygri> … So not sure whether we want a subproperty
… So not sure whether we want a subproperty ←
09:15:24 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
09:15:24 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
09:16:13 <cygri> cygri: I think the use of xhv here is broken; using subproperties would be better
Richard Cyganiak: I think the use of xhv here is broken; using subproperties would be better ←
09:16:48 <cygri> … Not sure how important the unversioned resource thing is. Having seen versioning modelled elsewhere, I expected to have it, but haven't thought about use cases here
… Not sure how important the unversioned resource thing is. Having seen versioning modelled elsewhere, I expected to have it, but haven't thought about use cases here ←
09:17:08 <cygri> PhilA: We should say that ADMS is not designed to do that
Phil Archer: We should say that ADMS is not designed to do that ←
09:17:55 <cygri> … So we should define subproperties of prev/next/last, and say that ADMS is not a generic versioning mechanism
… So we should define subproperties of prev/next/last, and say that ADMS is not a generic versioning mechanism ←
09:18:24 <cygri> MakxDekkers: Someone should define a generic versioning mechanism, it's needed and many people do it wrong
Makx Dekkers: Someone should define a generic versioning mechanism, it's needed and many people do it wrong ←
09:18:30 <DaveReynolds> FWIW in the UK have a tiny version: vocab. Illustrated at top of https://raw.github.com/wiki/der/ukl-registry-poc/images/registry-diagram.png
Dave Reynolds: FWIW in the UK have a tiny version: vocab. Illustrated at top of https://raw.github.com/wiki/der/ukl-registry-poc/images/registry-diagram.png ←
09:18:38 <cygri> … Uneasy about including more ADMS-specific stuff for this
… Uneasy about including more ADMS-specific stuff for this ←
09:19:08 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
09:19:11 <DaveReynolds> r-
Dave Reynolds: r- ←
09:19:14 <DaveReynolds> q-
Dave Reynolds: q- ←
09:20:31 <MakxDekkers> can't realy hear
Makx Dekkers: can't realy hear ←
09:20:40 <cygri> fadmaa: Good to have ADMS as a DCAT profile. Makes sense.
Fadi Maali: Good to have ADMS as a DCAT profile. Makes sense. ←
09:20:57 <cygri> q+
q+ ←
09:21:34 <cygri> … In DCAT, we specifically left open lots of ranges, to be restricted in profiles. ADMS does that in some places
… In DCAT, we specifically left open lots of ranges, to be restricted in profiles. ADMS does that in some places ←
09:22:24 <cygri> … the PeriodOfTime modelling is in the diagram but seems to be missing from the spec
… the PeriodOfTime modelling is in the diagram but seems to be missing from the spec ←
09:22:44 <fadmaa> ack me
Fadi Maali: ack me ←
09:23:49 <cygri> ACTION: PhilA to update ADMS to define subproperties for prev/next/last and write text around that
ACTION: PhilA to update ADMS to define subproperties for prev/next/last and write text around that ←
09:23:49 <trackbot> Created ACTION-116 - Update ADMS to define subproperties for prev/next/last and write text around that [on Phil Archer - due 2013-04-19].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-116 - Update ADMS to define subproperties for prev/next/last and write text around that [on Phil Archer - due 2013-04-19]. ←
09:24:42 <cygri> ACTION: PhilA to update ADMS to use DCAT properties instead of adms:distribution and dct:hasPart
ACTION: PhilA to update ADMS to use DCAT properties instead of adms:distribution and dct:hasPart ←
09:24:42 <trackbot> Created ACTION-117 - Update ADMS to use DCAT properties instead of adms:distribution and dct:hasPart [on Phil Archer - due 2013-04-19].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-117 - Update ADMS to use DCAT properties instead of adms:distribution and dct:hasPart [on Phil Archer - due 2013-04-19]. ←
09:27:15 <Gofran_Shukair> I am back to the call again
Gofran Shukair: I am back to the call again ←
09:27:31 <cygri> (discussion on whether DCAT catalog->dataset is hasPart or not)
(discussion on whether DCAT catalog->dataset is hasPart or not) ←
09:27:42 <cygri> fadmaa: (going through ADMS comments)
Fadi Maali: (going through ADMS comments) ←
09:28:36 <Gofran_Shukair> I have addressed 1. All typos reported were fixed 2. Clarifying the first part of the introduction that defines semantic asset 3. Move the description of the original development of ADMS to a new acknowledgments section
Gofran Shukair: I have addressed 1. All typos reported were fixed 2. Clarifying the first part of the introduction that defines semantic asset 3. Move the description of the original development of ADMS to a new acknowledgments section ←
09:28:37 <cygri> … James suggested to use foaf:page instead of adms:relatedWebPage
… James suggested to use foaf:page instead of adms:relatedWebPage ←
09:29:55 <cygri> … James suggested to rename representationTechnique, although no proposal
… James suggested to rename representationTechnique, although no proposal ←
09:30:13 <cygri> PhilA: It's horrible, but already implemented, and if no one can think of anything better we should just leave it
Phil Archer: It's horrible, but already implemented, and if no one can think of anything better we should just leave it ←
09:31:31 <DaveReynolds> Presumably could publish as an updated WD even if not ready to go to Note.
Dave Reynolds: Presumably could publish as an updated WD even if not ready to go to Note. ←
09:31:48 <fadmaa> PhilA: We have to wait for a couple of issues on DCAT to be resolved before being able to come to the group with a ready version of the ADMS as a note
Phil Archer: We have to wait for a couple of issues on DCAT to be resolved before being able to come to the group with a ready version of the ADMS as a note [ Scribe Assist by Fadi Maali ] ←
09:32:25 <fadmaa> cygri: Few issues on DCAT that could affect ADMS might take some time to be resolved
Richard Cyganiak: Few issues on DCAT that could affect ADMS might take some time to be resolved [ Scribe Assist by Fadi Maali ] ←
09:32:31 <MakxDekkers> better to wait and publishe a note that is consistent with final DCAT
Makx Dekkers: better to wait and publishe a note that is consistent with final DCAT ←
09:33:15 <fadmaa> ... ADMS can wait till DCAT is ready but I think it is better to publish it as it is now and then update it when DCAT is ready
Fadi Maali: ... ADMS can wait till DCAT is ready but I think it is better to publish it as it is now and then update it when DCAT is ready ←
09:33:28 <MakxDekkers> as long as it is versioned ;-)
Makx Dekkers: as long as it is versioned ;-) ←
09:33:53 <DaveReynolds> Sandro yesterday recommended for BP that if there's going to be multple versions then publish as WD (with status saying it would be a note)
Dave Reynolds: Sandro yesterday recommended for BP that if there's going to be multple versions then publish as WD (with status saying it would be a note) ←
09:34:36 <MakxDekkers> agree with Dave WD until DCAT is ready
Makx Dekkers: agree with Dave WD until DCAT is ready ←
09:34:38 <cygri> PhilA: Could either publish ADMS Note now, and update it when DCAT is ready; or wait until DCAT is done and only publish ADMS then
Phil Archer: Could either publish ADMS Note now, and update it when DCAT is ready; or wait until DCAT is done and only publish ADMS then ←
09:35:19 <cygri> HadleyBeeman: My preference is to get something out now
Hadley Beeman: My preference is to get something out now ←
09:35:26 <cygri> cygri: Agree with HadleyBeeman
Richard Cyganiak: Agree with HadleyBeeman ←
09:36:01 <Gofran_Shukair> +1
Gofran Shukair: +1 ←
09:38:06 <DaveReynolds> Is you want a WG vote for a Note, as opposed to WD, then we'll need adequate time to review. That's not likely to be possible for next Thursday.
Dave Reynolds: Is you want a WG vote for a Note, as opposed to WD, then we'll need adequate time to review. That's not likely to be possible for next Thursday. ←
09:38:07 <cygri> ACTION: cygri to raise issue on adms:includedAssed vs adms:includedItem
ACTION: cygri to raise issue on adms:includedAssed vs adms:includedItem ←
09:38:07 <trackbot> Created ACTION-118 - Raise issue on adms:includedAssed vs adms:includedItem [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2013-04-19].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-118 - Raise issue on adms:includedAssed vs adms:includedItem [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2013-04-19]. ←
09:38:30 <cygri> PhilA: Reasonable to take this comment back to ISA
Phil Archer: Reasonable to take this comment back to ISA ←
09:38:51 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
09:38:58 <cygri> ack me
ack me ←
09:40:05 <cygri> DaveReynolds: A draft should be available ahead of date where vote will be taken so that WG members can review it
Dave Reynolds: A draft should be available ahead of date where vote will be taken so that WG members can review it ←
09:40:48 <cygri> PhilA: Notice had been given
Phil Archer: Notice had been given ←
09:41:06 <cygri> … And things that will still be updated have been discussed today
… And things that will still be updated have been discussed today ←
09:41:23 <Gofran_Shukair> I have to le
Gofran Shukair: I have to le ←
09:41:32 <Gofran_Shukair> I have to leave now sorry
Gofran Shukair: I have to leave now sorry ←
09:41:45 <Gofran_Shukair> talk to you later
Gofran Shukair: talk to you later ←
09:42:00 <Gofran_Shukair> bye
Gofran Shukair: bye ←
09:42:15 <Gofran_Shukair> thanks to you Phil
Gofran Shukair: thanks to you Phil ←
09:42:25 <cygri> topic: Organization Vocabulary
09:43:34 <DaveReynolds> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_LC_comments
Dave Reynolds: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_LC_comments ←
09:43:37 <HadleyBeeman> scribe: hadleybeeman
(Scribe set to Phil Archer)
09:44:15 <HadleyBeeman> DaveReynolds: From original last call for ORG, we had a number of comments which we've addressed.
Dave Reynolds: From original last call for ORG, we had a number of comments which we've addressed. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:44:42 <HadleyBeeman> … Since then, we've had this accidentally extended period for last call, we've had 2 more comments.
Hadley Beeman: … Since then, we've had this accidentally extended period for last call, we've had 2 more comments. ←
09:45:09 <HadleyBeeman> … Resolved Bill Roberts's comment, he is satisfied.
Hadley Beeman: … Resolved Bill Roberts's comment, he is satisfied. ←
09:45:28 <HadleyBeeman> … All comments have been addressed, we have evidence of that.
Hadley Beeman: … All comments have been addressed, we have evidence of that. ←
09:45:40 <cygri> DaveReynolds, our call dropped
Richard Cyganiak: DaveReynolds, our call dropped ←
09:45:42 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
09:45:42 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
09:46:58 <HadleyBeeman> DaveReynolds: Question: whether the changes we made after the first last call were substantive, and should we have done another last call? The document was edited, but the second last call pointed to the original document without those changes in.
Dave Reynolds: Question: whether the changes we made after the first last call were substantive, and should we have done another last call? The document was edited, but the second last call pointed to the original document without those changes in. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:47:47 <HadleyBeeman> … The changes we made, I would argue, wouldn't have invalidated existing implementations.
Hadley Beeman: … The changes we made, I would argue, wouldn't have invalidated existing implementations. ←
09:47:59 <HadleyBeeman> … Assuming we're happy with that, and the transition meeting will be happy with that, we're fine.
Hadley Beeman: … Assuming we're happy with that, and the transition meeting will be happy with that, we're fine. ←
09:49:09 <HadleyBeeman> … One more comment from Joao-Paulo says that the diagram isn't normative, doesn't cover all features of ORG; he'd prefer it to be complete and in proper UML style. I prefer the current diagram, but I won't object if someone wants to provide that. No response. This is purely an editorial thing, but we need to decide to have one or decide we don't need one.
Hadley Beeman: … One more comment from Joao-Paulo says that the diagram isn't normative, doesn't cover all features of ORG; he'd prefer it to be complete and in proper UML style. I prefer the current diagram, but I won't object if someone wants to provide that. No response. This is purely an editorial thing, but we need to decide to have one or decide we don't need one. ←
09:49:18 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
09:49:27 <DaveReynolds> q-
Dave Reynolds: q- ←
09:49:30 <HadleyBeeman> … Next step: put things together for a transition meeting.
Hadley Beeman: … Next step: put things together for a transition meeting. ←
09:50:22 <BartvanLeeuwen> q+
Bart van Leeuwen: q+ ←
09:50:40 <HadleyBeeman> Cygri: Comment on the diagram (general comment on all our vocabulary documents). IT would be terrific if in those diagrams, I could click on things and go to the definition of the thing that was clicked. I understand this is difficult to do. Do we as a working group want to do this for all our specs?
Richard Cyganiak: Comment on the diagram (general comment on all our vocabulary documents). IT would be terrific if in those diagrams, I could click on things and go to the definition of the thing that was clicked. I understand this is difficult to do. Do we as a working group want to do this for all our specs? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:51:00 <HadleyBeeman> PhilA: clickable schema leading to an SVG diagram? that would be great.
Phil Archer: clickable schema leading to an SVG diagram? that would be great. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:51:30 <HadleyBeeman> Bartvanleeuwen: All the vocabularies have different types of diagrams. I agree, but I'm not sure we should take our time right now.
Bart van Leeuwen: All the vocabularies have different types of diagrams. I agree, but I'm not sure we should take our time right now. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:51:46 <HadleyBeeman> cygri: It is purely an editorial comment. Could be updated in the future.
Richard Cyganiak: It is purely an editorial comment. Could be updated in the future. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:51:51 <BartvanLeeuwen> ack me
Bart van Leeuwen: ack me ←
09:52:29 <cygri> ack me
Richard Cyganiak: ack me ←
09:53:10 <HadleyBeeman> davereynolds: It would be great. It would just take time to do it.
Dave Reynolds: It would be great. It would just take time to do it. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:53:55 <MakxDekkers> yes I
Makx Dekkers: yes I ←
09:54:09 <HadleyBeeman> Hadleybeeman: How is this not addressed by other working groups?
Hadley Beeman: How is this not addressed by other working groups? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:54:14 <MakxDekkers> sorry slip of keyboard
Makx Dekkers: sorry slip of keyboard ←
09:54:44 <HadleyBeeman> cygri: This is something we could raise on the mailing list.
Richard Cyganiak: This is something we could raise on the mailing list. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:55:50 <HadleyBeeman> davereynolds: there was a version of RDF Gravity that could visualise our ontologies. But the clickable diagram and low cost requirements are challenging.
Dave Reynolds: there was a version of RDF Gravity that could visualise our ontologies. But the clickable diagram and low cost requirements are challenging. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
09:57:58 <DaveReynolds> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_Timetable
Dave Reynolds: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_Timetable ←
09:59:15 <HadleyBeeman> DaveReynolds: If we're happy that we don't need another Last Call, then we just need to packing things up for transition to CR. Should take a few weeks to pull together that documentation (I'm guessing). I'm tied up next week, so two weeks after puts it into early may. Then a few weeks to transition/publication.
Dave Reynolds: If we're happy that we don't need another Last Call, then we just need to packing things up for transition to CR. Should take a few weeks to pull together that documentation (I'm guessing). I'm tied up next week, so two weeks after puts it into early may. Then a few weeks to transition/publication. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:00:49 <HadleyBeeman> PROPOSED: having examined the summary for ORG comments, another iteration of Last Call for ORG is not needed.
PROPOSED: having examined the summary for ORG comments, another iteration of Last Call for ORG is not needed. ←
10:01:00 <PhilA> +1
+1 ←
10:01:01 <DaveReynolds> +1
Dave Reynolds: +1 ←
10:01:02 <bhyland1> +1
Bernadette Hyland: +1 ←
10:01:03 <fadmaa> +1
Fadi Maali: +1 ←
10:01:05 <gatemezi> +1
Ghislain Atemezing: +1 ←
10:01:06 <BartvanLeeuwen> +1
Bart van Leeuwen: +1 ←
10:01:15 <HadleyBeeman> RESOLVED: having examined the summary for ORG comments, another iteration of Last Call for ORG is not needed.
RESOLVED: having examined the summary for ORG comments, another iteration of Last Call for ORG is not needed. ←
10:01:18 <DeirdreLee> +1
Deirdre Lee: +1 ←
10:01:23 <MakxDekkers> +1
Makx Dekkers: +1 ←
10:01:30 <martinA> +1
Martín Álvarez: +1 ←
10:02:55 <HadleyBeeman> Sandro: Someone should review the editorial changes to ORG before we vote to go to CR
Sandro Hawke: Someone should review the editorial changes to ORG before we vote to go to CR [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:03:02 <HadleyBeeman> … (two people)
Hadley Beeman: … (two people) ←
10:03:23 <cygri> +1
Richard Cyganiak: +1 ←
10:03:29 <bhyland1> zakim, who is on the call?
Bernadette Hyland: zakim, who is on the call? ←
10:03:29 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
10:04:22 <HadleyBeeman> Sandro: review could happen today?
Sandro Hawke: review could happen today? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:05:04 <PhilA> zakim, mute martinA
zakim, mute martinA ←
10:05:04 <Zakim> sorry, PhilA, I do not know which phone connection belongs to martinA
Zakim IRC Bot: sorry, PhilA, I do not know which phone connection belongs to martinA ←
10:06:14 <HadleyBeeman> DaveReynolds: Last change to ORG was in response to the response to the PROV WG. Has anyone looked at it since then?
Dave Reynolds: Last change to ORG was in response to the response to the PROV WG. Has anyone looked at it since then? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:06:27 <HadleyBeeman> … Could we have a volunteer to do that?
Hadley Beeman: … Could we have a volunteer to do that? ←
10:06:37 <HadleyBeeman> … We can then vote when that's done and we have the exit criteria for CR.
Hadley Beeman: … We can then vote when that's done and we have the exit criteria for CR. ←
10:06:38 <fadmaa> I can do that
Fadi Maali: I can do that ←
10:06:55 <cygri> me too
Richard Cyganiak: me too ←
10:08:00 <HadleyBeeman> 5 min break
Hadley Beeman: 5 min break ←
10:08:21 <bhyland1> Resuming at 11.15AM Dublin time
Bernadette Hyland: Resuming at 11.15AM Dublin time ←
10:15:55 <MakxDekkers> i am back in
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Makx Dekkers: i am back in ←
10:16:00 <martinA> Back
Martín Álvarez: Back ←
10:19:09 <HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-vocab-regorg-20130108/
Hadley Beeman: http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-vocab-regorg-20130108/ ←
10:19:22 <HadleyBeeman> Topic: RegORG
10:19:38 <HadleyBeeman> PhilA: RegORG, we've previously decided, is a profile of ORG.
Phil Archer: RegORG, we've previously decided, is a profile of ORG. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:20:06 <HadleyBeeman> … We have no open Tracker issues on RegORG
Hadley Beeman: … We have no open Tracker issues on RegORG ←
10:20:50 <sandro> +Sandro
Sandro Hawke: +Sandro ←
10:21:06 <BartvanLeeuwen> :)
Bart van Leeuwen: :) ←
10:21:41 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
10:21:49 <HadleyBeeman> … I need to reconcile dcterms:type as aproplert on adms:identifier, or should it just be a type:literal on adms:notation. (This is a new issue on regORG: alignment on ADMS identifier)
Hadley Beeman: … I need to reconcile dcterms:type as aproplert on adms:identifier, or should it just be a type:literal on adms:notation. (This is a new issue on regORG: alignment on ADMS identifier) ←
10:22:55 <HadleyBeeman> davereynolds: noticed admsscheme:agency ?
Dave Reynolds: noticed adms:schemaAgency ? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:23:07 <HadleyBeeman> phila: It's a literal. I need to make that clearer.
Phil Archer: It's a literal. I need to make that clearer. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:23:33 <HadleyBeeman> s/admsscheme:agency/adms:schemaAgency
10:24:08 <HadleyBeeman> phila: best practice doesn't say anything about encoding skos?
Phil Archer: best practice doesn't say anything about encoding skos? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:24:53 <HadleyBeeman> DaveReynolds: SDMS attribute code. Published as XML, using Jena. Mechanical translation. Info may be in the google group.
Dave Reynolds: SDMS attribute code. Published as XML, using Jena. Mechanical translation. Info may be in the google group. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:25:05 <HadleyBeeman> PhilA: that is an example on how to do it; would be nice to have it as documentation.
Phil Archer: that is an example on how to do it; would be nice to have it as documentation. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:25:51 <HadleyBeeman> … I'd like to do something on how to create a SKOS concept scheme from a PDF of a vocabulary. We haven't got time to do it though.
Hadley Beeman: … I'd like to do something on how to create a SKOS concept scheme from a PDF of a vocabulary. We haven't got time to do it though. ←
10:26:19 <HadleyBeeman> bhyland: I'm making a note to see about addressing this in Best Practices. People always ask how to do that.
Bernadette Hyland: I'm making a note to see about addressing this in Best Practices. People always ask how to do that. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:26:54 <HadleyBeeman> philA: in mapping between ORG and RegORG: it should be a vertical list (to be mobile-friendly). I'll get rid of the table.
Phil Archer: in mapping between ORG and RegORG: it should be a vertical list (to be mobile-friendly). I'll get rid of the table. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:28:04 <HadleyBeeman> … Want to point from org:organization to the registeredOrganization. We should just keep the domain of registeredOrganization as foaf:agent
Hadley Beeman: … Want to point from org:organization to the registeredOrganization. We should just keep the domain of registeredOrganization as foaf:agent ←
10:28:36 <HadleyBeeman> … Marios, as co-editor, will be helping with this.
Hadley Beeman: … Marios, as co-editor, will be helping with this. ←
10:29:38 <HadleyBeeman> … I will fix the issue re adms:identifier. Next version to group, which will be the final note. Bottom line, nothing huge on it. We haven't received many comments (though we may not have asked them for it.)
Hadley Beeman: … I will fix the issue re adms:identifier. Next version to group, which will be the final note. Bottom line, nothing huge on it. We haven't received many comments (though we may not have asked them for it.) ←
10:31:10 <HadleyBeeman> scribe: deirdrelee
(Scribe set to Deirdre Lee)
10:33:05 <bhyland1> Topic: Exit Criteria for CR
10:33:20 <DeirdreLee> sandro: requirement that at least 2 systems have to pass the test suite is to prove that the spec could be implemented and could be implemented interoperably
Sandro Hawke: requirement that at least 2 systems have to pass the test suite is to prove that the spec could be implemented and could be implemented interoperably ←
10:33:20 <HadleyBeeman> Each item in a test suite needs to be passed by two implementations
Hadley Beeman: Each item in a test suite needs to be passed by two implementations ←
10:34:44 <DeirdreLee> ... if there is no software consuming the data, it is difficult to identify if data is being published incorrectly
... if there is no software consuming the data, it is difficult to identify if data is being published incorrectly ←
10:35:01 <DeirdreLee> ... therefore there's a need to show data consumption as well as publication
... therefore there's a need to show data consumption as well as publication ←
10:35:11 <PhilA> q+
Phil Archer: q+ ←
10:35:34 <DeirdreLee> ... should every term be used? I would say so, as that is the only way we can show that the term is being correctly utilised
... should every term be used? I would say so, as that is the only way we can show that the term is being correctly utilised ←
10:36:06 <DeirdreLee> ... so every term in spec should be used in 2 publication implementations, and most terms in 2 consumption implementations
... so every term in spec should be used in 2 publication implementations, and most terms in 2 consumption implementations ←
10:36:17 <bhyland1> q?
Bernadette Hyland: q? ←
10:36:20 <HadleyBeeman> q+
Hadley Beeman: q+ ←
10:36:27 <bhyland1> q
10:36:30 <bhyland1> q+
Bernadette Hyland: q+ ←
10:36:38 <PhilA> ack DaveReynolds
Phil Archer: ack DaveReynolds ←
10:37:15 <bhyland1> ack bhyland
Bernadette Hyland: ack bhyland ←
10:37:27 <DeirdreLee> DaveReynolds: agrees that this is a high bar. it would require people on our side to record all implementations and to see if every term is being used from every vocab
Dave Reynolds: agrees that this is a high bar. it would require people on our side to record all implementations and to see if every term is being used from every vocab ←
10:37:55 <DeirdreLee> ... to show that we pass the exit criteria test
... to show that we pass the exit criteria test ←
10:39:06 <MakxDekkers> I wonder whether things like dcterms and foaf would pass the test?
Makx Dekkers: I wonder whether things like dcterms and foaf would pass the test? ←
10:39:24 <DeirdreLee> ... if consumption is to prove that terms are being interpreted in the same way, we would need a consumption implementation from a different publisher implementer
... if consumption is to prove that terms are being interpreted in the same way, we would need a consumption implementation from a different publisher implementer ←
10:40:06 <DeirdreLee> ... another point: if we have no evidence of a given term being used, should the term be deleted?
... another point: if we have no evidence of a given term being used, should the term be deleted? ←
10:40:15 <DeirdreLee> ... DaveReynolds does not think so
... DaveReynolds does not think so ←
10:40:31 <DeirdreLee> ... it may be useful in the future
... it may be useful in the future ←
10:40:45 <DeirdreLee> sandro: we could argue for a lower bar
Sandro Hawke: we could argue for a lower bar ←
10:40:55 <DaveReynolds> q-
Dave Reynolds: q- ←
10:40:55 <PhilA> ack me
Phil Archer: ack me ←
10:41:03 <bhyland1> q+
Bernadette Hyland: q+ ←
10:41:04 <DeirdreLee> DaveReynolds: difficulty with a lower bar is that it is more difficult to define
Dave Reynolds: difficulty with a lower bar is that it is more difficult to define ←
10:42:05 <DeirdreLee> PhilA: PhilA has done some work iwht the Greek gov using google refine, suggesting it could be plugged into the organogram
Phil Archer: PhilA has done some work iwht the Greek gov using google refine, suggesting it could be plugged into the organogram ←
10:42:32 <DeirdreLee> ... organogram from data.gov.uk
... organogram from data.gov.uk ←
10:42:44 <BartvanLeeuwen> q+
Bart van Leeuwen: q+ ←
10:43:20 <sandro> +1 phil Yeah, it's probably enough to have multiple instance data files and inspect them by hand to make sure the terms are being used consistently
Sandro Hawke: +1 phil Yeah, it's probably enough to have multiple instance data files and inspect them by hand to make sure the terms are being used consistently ←
10:43:40 <DeirdreLee> ... so for org ontology, PhilA proposes....?
... so for org ontology, PhilA proposes....? ←
10:44:07 <DeirdreLee> ... for dcat, we could look at data.gov.fr to see how they're using it
... for dcat, we could look at data.gov.fr to see how they're using it ←
10:44:21 <MakxDekkers> daon't forget the spanish DCAT profile
Makx Dekkers: daon't forget the spanish DCAT profile ←
10:44:34 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
10:44:53 <PhilA> ack HadleyBeeman
Phil Archer: ack HadleyBeeman ←
10:45:04 <HadleyBeeman> draft http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition
Hadley Beeman: draft http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition ←
10:45:11 <DeirdreLee> ... for dcat, we have a wide range of people looking at it & implementations,which we can use to see how it is being used, how the terms are being understood
... for dcat, we have a wide range of people looking at it & implementations,which we can use to see how it is being used, how the terms are being understood ←
10:45:41 <martinA> Not for the English version yet
Martín Álvarez: Not for the English version yet ←
10:46:05 <DaveReynolds> PROV did a very high bar process
Dave Reynolds: PROV did a very high bar process ←
10:46:07 <HadleyBeeman> ack me
Hadley Beeman: ack me ←
10:46:08 <DeirdreLee> HadleyBeeman: are there any other groups that have gone through this CR process, who we can learn from
Hadley Beeman: are there any other groups that have gone through this CR process, who we can learn from ←
10:46:15 <DeirdreLee> cygri: skos & prov
Richard Cyganiak: skos & prov ←
10:46:27 <DeirdreLee> DaveReynolds: sparql
Dave Reynolds: sparql ←
10:46:33 <PhilA> Prov CR Exit Criteria http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria#PROV_CR_Exit_Criteria
Phil Archer: Prov CR Exit Criteria http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvCRExitCriteria#PROV_CR_Exit_Criteria ←
10:46:33 <martinA> technical specification on PSI reuse in Spain: http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/03/04/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-2380.pdf
Martín Álvarez: technical specification on PSI reuse in Spain: http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/03/04/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-2380.pdf ←
10:47:03 <gatemezi> Some uses of ORG: http://stats.lod2.eu/vocabularies/149
Ghislain Atemezing: Some uses of ORG: http://stats.lod2.eu/vocabularies/149 ←
10:47:09 <DeirdreLee> bhyland1: would question if existing rec would reach the high bar
Bernadette Hyland: would question if existing rec would reach the high bar ←
10:47:23 <PhilA> For the record http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/03/04/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-2380.pdf is a profile of DCAT as used in Spain (doc is in Spanish)
Phil Archer: For the record http://www.boe.es/boe/dias/2013/03/04/pdfs/BOE-A-2013-2380.pdf is a profile of DCAT as used in Spain (doc is in Spanish) ←
10:47:43 <DeirdreLee> sandro: happy to lower bar to what DaveReynolds suggested, that implementations could be manually inspected
Sandro Hawke: happy to lower bar to what DaveReynolds suggested, that implementations could be manually inspected ←
10:47:46 <HadleyBeeman> for reference, the exit criteria for SKOS to get to CR: 1. At least two implementations have been demonstrated that use
Hadley Beeman: for reference, the exit criteria for SKOS to get to CR: 1. At least two implementations have been demonstrated that use ←
10:47:46 <HadleyBeeman> features of the SKOS vocabulary. Other vocabularies that use
Hadley Beeman: features of the SKOS vocabulary. Other vocabularies that use ←
10:47:46 <HadleyBeeman> SKOS are candidates for inclusion in the implementation report.
Hadley Beeman: SKOS are candidates for inclusion in the implementation report. ←
10:47:46 <HadleyBeeman> 2. All issues raised during the CR period against this document
Hadley Beeman: 2. All issues raised during the CR period against this document ←
10:47:46 <HadleyBeeman> have received formal responses.
Hadley Beeman: have received formal responses. ←
10:47:51 <BartvanLeeuwen> ack bhyland
Bart van Leeuwen: ack bhyland ←
10:47:59 <MakxDekkers> the European AP draft is at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/asset_release/dcat-application-profile-data-portals-europe-draft-1
Makx Dekkers: the European AP draft is at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/asset_release/dcat-application-profile-data-portals-europe-draft-1 ←
10:48:27 <DeirdreLee> sandro: this is not uncommon, WEBIDL has been stuck in CR for over a year, although it is widely used
Sandro Hawke: this is not uncommon, WEBIDL has been stuck in CR for over a year, although it is widely used ←
10:48:40 <martinA> Also for the record, this is a draft with a guide for using the Spanish DCAT Profile and other best practices on PSI publication using Linked Data: http://administracionelectronica.gob.es/recursos/pae_000023387.pdf (also in Spanish, I'm sorry)
Martín Álvarez: Also for the record, this is a draft with a guide for using the Spanish DCAT Profile and other best practices on PSI publication using Linked Data: http://administracionelectronica.gob.es/recursos/pae_000023387.pdf (also in Spanish, I'm sorry) ←
10:49:10 <DeirdreLee> HadleyBeeman: the skos exit criteria is much less laborious
Hadley Beeman: the skos exit criteria is much less laborious ←
10:49:24 <DeirdreLee> PhilA: prov-o exit criteria is very complex
Phil Archer: prov-o exit criteria is very complex ←
10:49:36 <cygri> q?
Richard Cyganiak: q? ←
10:49:51 <DeirdreLee> HadleyBeeman: have we settled on 2 implementations?
Hadley Beeman: have we settled on 2 implementations? ←
10:50:08 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
10:50:57 <DeirdreLee> PhilA: we should at least have one publication implementation for every term, and if a term is used in multiple implementations, it should be used in a common way
Phil Archer: we should at least have one publication implementation for every term, and if a term is used in multiple implementations, it should be used in a common way ←
10:51:01 <cygri> q?
Richard Cyganiak: q? ←
10:51:24 <HadleyBeeman> sandro: do we need example files? Not a full test suite, but evidence it works?
Sandro Hawke: do we need example files? Not a full test suite, but evidence it works? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
10:52:04 <DeirdreLee> BartvanLeeuwen: is publication of org data for the community directory count as a valid implementation (using or not using diromatic)
Bart van Leeuwen: is publication of org data for the community directory count as a valid implementation (using or not using diromatic) ←
10:52:21 <DeirdreLee> bhyland1: yes
Bernadette Hyland: yes ←
10:53:37 <BartvanLeeuwen> ack me
Bart van Leeuwen: ack me ←
10:53:42 <DeirdreLee> PhilA: we could use the Community Directory as an implementation
Phil Archer: we could use the Community Directory as an implementation ←
10:54:57 <DeirdreLee> BartvanLeeuwen: could we describe the comm directory using dcat?
Bart van Leeuwen: could we describe the comm directory using dcat? ←
10:55:02 <DeirdreLee> fadmaa: comm directory is not a data catalogue
Fadi Maali: comm directory is not a data catalogue ←
10:55:14 <MakxDekkers> anything can be a dataset
Makx Dekkers: anything can be a dataset ←
10:55:26 <cygri> q?
Richard Cyganiak: q? ←
10:55:42 <DeirdreLee> PhilA: comm directory could be a data catalogue
Phil Archer: comm directory could be a data catalogue ←
10:55:58 <gatemezi> An attempt of using DCAT by the city of Montpellier.. http://opendata.montpelliernumerique.fr/datastore/villeMTP_MTP_Opendata.zip
Ghislain Atemezing: An attempt of using DCAT by the city of Montpellier.. http://opendata.montpelliernumerique.fr/datastore/villeMTP_MTP_Opendata.zip ←
10:56:11 <gatemezi> They are still using an old version of DCAT
Ghislain Atemezing: They are still using an old version of DCAT ←
10:57:00 <martinA> http://dadesobertes.gencat.cat/recursos/datasets/cataleg.rdf (Catalonia)
Martín Álvarez: http://dadesobertes.gencat.cat/recursos/datasets/cataleg.rdf (Catalonia) ←
10:57:22 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
10:57:25 <PhilA> ack cygri
Phil Archer: ack cygri ←
10:57:52 <gatemezi> q?
Ghislain Atemezing: q? ←
10:58:47 <DeirdreLee> cygri: calling a publisher an implemtation of a vocab is not a very useful way of showing that a vocab is right
Richard Cyganiak: calling a publisher an implemtation of a vocab is not a very useful way of showing that a vocab is right ←
10:59:10 <DeirdreLee> ... anyone can throw something together, but this does not show that this facilitates successful interoperability
... anyone can throw something together, but this does not show that this facilitates successful interoperability ←
10:59:48 <bhyland1> +10 to a test suite that consumes a given vocabulary and does something basic & simple.
Bernadette Hyland: +10 to a test suite that consumes a given vocabulary and does something basic & simple. ←
11:00:09 <DeirdreLee> ... a better way might be to create a test suite that uses the vocabulary, and show that there are two consumers can do something useful with these 'agreed upon' published data
... a better way might be to create a test suite that uses the vocabulary, and show that there are two consumers can do something useful with these 'agreed upon' published data ←
11:00:12 <PhilA> q+ with possible route to 'implementations'
Phil Archer: q+ with possible route to 'implementations' ←
11:00:12 <martinA> I'm sorry, I have to leave. Enjoy the rest of the meeting. I'll read the minutes. See you soon.
Martín Álvarez: I'm sorry, I have to leave. Enjoy the rest of the meeting. I'll read the minutes. See you soon. ←
11:00:16 <bhyland1> That would help vocab designers, publishers & consumers.
Bernadette Hyland: That would help vocab designers, publishers & consumers. ←
11:00:24 <PhilA> q+ to offer a possible route to 'implementations'
Phil Archer: q+ to offer a possible route to 'implementations' ←
11:00:37 <sandro> q+ to ask about grad students and interns
Sandro Hawke: q+ to ask about grad students and interns ←
11:00:44 <martinA> Thanks
Martín Álvarez: Thanks ←
11:00:45 <DeirdreLee> ... this way we have a testing ecosystem and would be much stronger evidence that the vocabs are interoperable
... this way we have a testing ecosystem and would be much stronger evidence that the vocabs are interoperable ←
11:01:04 <bhyland1> FTR - I'm much more comfortable with what cygri just decribed.
Bernadette Hyland: FTR - I'm much more comfortable with what cygri just decribed. ←
11:01:37 <DeirdreLee> bhyland1: much more consistent approach, it compares apples with apples
Bernadette Hyland: much more consistent approach, it compares apples with apples ←
11:02:48 <DaveReynolds> Yes!!!!!
Dave Reynolds: Yes!!!!! ←
11:03:07 <DeirdreLee> ... if a simple client can use the data, as a simple visualisation, listing or whatever, it would be more consistent
... if a simple client can use the data, as a simple visualisation, listing or whatever, it would be more consistent ←
11:03:27 <DeirdreLee> Sandro: isn't this bar higher than what was initially proposed?
Sandro Hawke: isn't this bar higher than what was initially proposed? ←
11:04:13 <sandro> q?
Sandro Hawke: q? ←
11:04:21 <PhilA> q-
Phil Archer: q- ←
11:04:35 <DeirdreLee> bhyland1: to have something like an RDF validator, this being a vocab validator, would prove usefulness of vocab
Bernadette Hyland: to have something like an RDF validator, this being a vocab validator, would prove usefulness of vocab ←
11:05:04 <DeirdreLee> ... simply publishing data using a vocab does not show the usefulness or the interoperability of the vocab
... simply publishing data using a vocab does not show the usefulness or the interoperability of the vocab ←
11:05:53 <DeirdreLee> DaveReynolds: we do not have the option of automatic vocab validation
Dave Reynolds: we do not have the option of automatic vocab validation ←
11:06:10 <bhyland1> This is a suggestion for future vocabulary efforts to validate fitness for use.
Bernadette Hyland: This is a suggestion for future vocabulary efforts to validate fitness for use. ←
11:06:11 <cygri> (I agree with DaveReynolds, automatic validation is not really possible here. appropriate use can't be automatically validated.)
Richard Cyganiak: (I agree with DaveReynolds, automatic validation is not really possible here. appropriate use can't be automatically validated.) ←
11:06:13 <sandro> DaveReynolds: We could validate at some low level, like types, but we can't automatically tell whether this person is really the manager vs subordinate
Dave Reynolds: We could validate at some low level, like types, but we can't automatically tell whether this person is really the manager vs subordinate [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
11:06:15 <DeirdreLee> .. but validation of apropriateness of use would take manual inspection
.. but validation of apropriateness of use would take manual inspection ←
11:06:26 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
11:06:40 <DeirdreLee> ack DaveReynolds
ack DaveReynolds ←
11:07:11 <DeirdreLee> ... a visualisation of data would also not be a validation
... a visualisation of data would also not be a validation ←
11:07:37 <DeirdreLee> ... therefore we should define what we mean by 'consumption' for the CR exit criteria
... therefore we should define what we mean by 'consumption' for the CR exit criteria ←
11:08:32 <sandro> q+ sandro2 to say I think visualization is okay if it's semantic (like an organogram)
Sandro Hawke: q+ sandro2 to say I think visualization is okay if it's semantic (like an organogram) ←
11:08:43 <DeirdreLee> PhilA: to clarify what DaveReynolds said, a tool can be built to visualise data modelled by a vocab, but it does not demonstrate that the vocab and its terms have been understood and used consistently
Phil Archer: to clarify what DaveReynolds said, a tool can be built to visualise data modelled by a vocab, but it does not demonstrate that the vocab and its terms have been understood and used consistently ←
11:09:17 <HadleyBeeman> q?
Hadley Beeman: q? ←
11:09:21 <PhilA> q+ to look at the conformance criteria such as http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/#conformance
Phil Archer: q+ to look at the conformance criteria such as http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/#conformance ←
11:09:42 <DeirdreLee> bhyland1: if there is a sample of test publication data, there will be consistency with the consumption approach
Bernadette Hyland: if there is a sample of test publication data, there will be consistency with the consumption approach ←
11:09:51 <gatemezi> Yes PhillA.. a conformance-validator vocab
Ghislain Atemezing: Yes PhilA.. a conformance-validator vocab ←
11:10:05 <sandro> (I'm so confused at bhyland1 switching from bar-1 is too high and bar-2 is great, when bar-2 is higher than bar-1)
Sandro Hawke: (I'm so confused at bhyland1 switching from bar-1 is too high and bar-2 is great, when bar-2 is higher than bar-1) ←
11:10:11 <DeirdreLee> ... the point is to show data interoperability
... the point is to show data interoperability ←
11:10:12 <gatemezi> s/PhillA/PhilA
11:10:31 <sandro> ack sandro
Sandro Hawke: ack sandro ←
11:10:31 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to ask about grad students and interns
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to ask about grad students and interns ←
11:10:36 <fadmaa> scribe: fadmaa
(Scribe set to Fadi Maali)
11:11:03 <fadmaa> sandro: cygri's bar seams to be higher than the one I set
Sandro Hawke: cygri's bar seams to be higher than the one I set ←
11:11:18 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
11:11:34 <bhyland1> Yes Sandro, I agree that the vocab validator in a way is higher than what you described, but it responds to the suggestion that I understood Richard was making about a test harness.
Bernadette Hyland: Yes Sandro, I agree that the vocab validator in a way is higher than what you described, but it responds to the suggestion that I understood Richard was making about a test harness. ←
11:11:41 <fadmaa> sandro: would you consider having a student or an intern working on a project as an implementation
sandro, would you consider having a student or an intern working on a project as an implementation ←
11:12:06 <sandro> s/sandro:/sandro,/
11:12:09 <sandro> fadmaa, yes,
Sandro Hawke: fadmaa, yes, ←
11:12:12 <fadmaa> cygri: I am not so interested in who is using these vocabularies because you can use it but you might be using it wrongly
Richard Cyganiak: I am not so interested in who is using these vocabularies because you can use it but you might be using it wrongly ←
11:12:22 <bhyland1> cygri: A developer could "use" a vocab but do it all wrong. Thus, use alone doesn't mean the vocab is "good".
Richard Cyganiak: A developer could "use" a vocab but do it all wrong. Thus, use alone doesn't mean the vocab is "good". [ Scribe Assist by Bernadette Hyland ] ←
11:13:48 <fadmaa> cygri: the testcase can be something like I have an organization and it contains a department named X. if this is expressed in triples using org
Richard Cyganiak: the testcase can be something like I have an organization and it contains a department named X. if this is expressed in triples using org ←
11:13:49 <sandro> imagining "org-check" which checks for things like loops in the hierarchy
Sandro Hawke: imagining "org-check" which checks for things like loops in the hierarchy ←
11:14:25 <fadmaa> ... if a consumer can understand the existence of an organization and department by looking into the triples that can be called a success
... if a consumer can understand the existence of an organization and department by looking into the triples that can be called a success ←
11:14:32 <fadmaa> ... this doesn't have to be automatic
... this doesn't have to be automatic ←
11:15:13 <sandro> q- sandro2
Sandro Hawke: q- sandro2 ←
11:15:18 <sandro> ack cygri
Sandro Hawke: ack cygri ←
11:15:30 <bhyland1> FTR - I wasn't suggesting painting a picture of class names & properties as a harness. That would be useless IMO.
Bernadette Hyland: FTR - I wasn't suggesting painting a picture of class names & properties as a harness. That would be useless IMO. ←
11:15:39 <fadmaa> cygri: regarding the issue of consuming the triples via some visualizations of the data, this is actually just another way of presenting the triple and not really understanding the vocabulary
Richard Cyganiak: regarding the issue of consuming the triples via some visualizations of the data, this is actually just another way of presenting the triple and not really understanding the vocabulary ←
11:15:53 <PhilA> ack me
Phil Archer: ack me ←
11:15:53 <Zakim> PhilA, you wanted to look at the conformance criteria such as http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/#conformance
Zakim IRC Bot: PhilA, you wanted to look at the conformance criteria such as http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-org/#conformance ←
11:16:26 <fadmaa> PhilA: we should look into the conformance sections we added to all the vocabularies
PhilA,we should look into the conformance sections we added to all the vocabularies ←
11:16:56 <fadmaa> ... the conformance states that you use the proper term from the vocabulary when one exists
... the conformance states that you use the proper term from the vocabulary when one exists ←
11:17:05 <gatemezi> s/PhilA: /PhilA,/
11:17:11 <fadmaa> ... it doesn't have to be a use of the whole vocabulary
... it doesn't have to be a use of the whole vocabulary ←
11:17:42 <fadmaa> ... we can use the conformance as exit criteria
... we can use the conformance as exit criteria ←
11:18:12 <fadmaa> ... I did some work on the org vocabulary
... I did some work on the org vocabulary ←
11:18:36 <HadleyBeeman> q?
Hadley Beeman: q? ←
11:18:37 <MakxDekkers> had that discussion at DCMI; the questions was: can you conform to Dublin Core if you use only one of the terms?
Makx Dekkers: had that discussion at DCMI; the questions was: can you conform to Dublin Core if you use only one of the terms? ←
11:18:48 <fadmaa> ... in the spirit of using data represented in the ORG vocabulary based on the conformance criteria
... in the spirit of using data represented in the ORG vocabulary based on the conformance criteria ←
11:20:05 <PhilA> The pilot study on ORG done under the ISA Programme is at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/D5.2.1%20-Report%20on%20the%20Greek%20Linked%20Open%20Government%20Data%20Pilot%20-%20v0.06.pdf
Phil Archer: The pilot study on ORG done under the ISA Programme is at https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/D5.2.1%20-Report%20on%20the%20Greek%20Linked%20Open%20Government%20Data%20Pilot%20-%20v0.06.pdf ←
11:20:32 <fadmaa> DaveReynolds, It'll be very hard to write some criteria of correct consumption of a vocabulary
DaveReynolds, It'll be very hard to write some criteria of correct consumption of a vocabulary ←
11:21:17 <fadmaa> DaveReynolds, what is the criteria of how independent the implementations should be
DaveReynolds, what is the criteria of how independent the implementations should be ←
11:21:32 <fadmaa> sandro, there is no restriction on this
sandro, there is no restriction on this ←
11:21:34 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
11:21:45 <DaveReynolds> ack me
Dave Reynolds: ack me ←
11:21:56 <HadleyBeeman> q+
Hadley Beeman: q+ ←
11:22:03 <cygri> q+ to respond to DaveReynolds' point about generic RDF consumers
Richard Cyganiak: q+ to respond to DaveReynolds' point about generic RDF consumers ←
11:22:34 <HadleyBeeman> ack cygri
Hadley Beeman: ack cygri ←
11:22:34 <Zakim> cygri, you wanted to respond to DaveReynolds' point about generic RDF consumers
Zakim IRC Bot: cygri, you wanted to respond to DaveReynolds' point about generic RDF consumers ←
11:22:36 <fadmaa> cygri: negative test cases is the answer to the generic RDF consumer
Richard Cyganiak: negative test cases is the answer to the generic RDF consumer ←
11:23:17 <fadmaa> ... a conforming implementation shouldn't use terms from outside the vocabulary when one exists in it
... a conforming implementation shouldn't use terms from outside the vocabulary when one exists in it ←
11:23:29 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
11:24:08 <fadmaa> ... an ORG implementation will consume non-conformant data differently than the conformant data
... an ORG implementation will consume non-conformant data differently than the conformant data ←
11:24:30 <PhilA> ack HadleyBeeman
Phil Archer: ack HadleyBeeman ←
11:25:16 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: It's important for us to be able to demonstrate that consuming implementations are useful. But we need to show that the vocab is useful. is ORG useful?
Hadley Beeman: It's important for us to be able to demonstrate that consuming implementations are useful. But we need to show that the vocab is useful. is ORG useful? [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←
11:25:21 <fadmaa> HadleyBeeman: it is important to be able to demonstrate that what we have done is useful but am worried about putting too much emphasis about the existence of implementation
Hadley Beeman: it is important to be able to demonstrate that what we have done is useful but am worried about putting too much emphasis about the existence of implementation ←
11:25:36 <PhilA> ack DaveReynolds
Phil Archer: ack DaveReynolds ←
11:26:32 <HadleyBeeman> Yes. Also that there are reasons that might stop implementations consuming ORG, for example, that might not mean that ORG is useful and well-constructed. (Market activities, etc.) There are other dependencies that are not just "have we built ORG well and usefully?"
Hadley Beeman: Yes. Also that there are reasons that might stop implementations consuming ORG, for example, that might not mean that ORG is useful and well-constructed. (Market activities, etc.) There are other dependencies that are not just "have we built ORG well and usefully?" ←
11:26:43 <fadmaa> DaveReynolds: vocabularies are extensible. if the vocabulary was extended by subclassing for example an implementation would pass the testcase only if it does RDFS inference
Dave Reynolds: vocabularies are extensible. if the vocabulary was extended by subclassing for example an implementation would pass the testcase only if it does RDFS inference ←
11:27:38 <fadmaa> DaveReynolds: Cube can be mechanically processed while ORG and DCAT are more targeted for visualizations and the like
Dave Reynolds: Cube can be mechanically processed while ORG and DCAT are more targeted for visualizations and the like ←
11:28:07 <fadmaa> ... criteria for cube might need to be different than those for ORG and DCAT
... criteria for cube might need to be different than those for ORG and DCAT ←
11:28:20 <fadmaa> ... we have a checking criteria for Cube
... we have a checking criteria for Cube ←
11:29:15 <fadmaa> sandro: we have two opinions regarding the exit criteria
Sandro Hawke: we have two opinions regarding the exit criteria ←
11:29:42 <HadleyBeeman> sandro: the question seems to be: do we need code written to consume the vocabularies, or not?
Sandro Hawke: the question seems to be: do we need code written to consume the vocabularies, or not? [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
11:30:43 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds: QB includes explicit integrity constraints. The exit criteria may need to include validation of publications against those constraints.
Dave Reynolds: QB includes explicit integrity constraints. The exit criteria may need to include validation of publications against those constraints. [ Scribe Assist by Dave Reynolds ] ←
11:30:50 <fadmaa> PhilA: reading the conformance section of Data Cube, you still need a human being to confirm conformance
Phil Archer: reading the conformance section of Data Cube, you still need a human being to confirm conformance ←
11:31:25 <fadmaa> sandro: the RDF validator checks part automatically but asks human input for other parts
Sandro Hawke: the RDF validator checks part automatically but asks human input for other parts ←
11:31:58 <fadmaa> PhilA: a tool is useful but you still need a human judgement
Phil Archer: a tool is useful but you still need a human judgement ←
11:32:06 <bhyland1> +1
Bernadette Hyland: +1 ←
11:32:12 <MakxDekkers> +1
Makx Dekkers: +1 ←
11:32:13 <fadmaa> ... it'd be great to have a tool but it is not mandatory
... it'd be great to have a tool but it is not mandatory ←
11:32:18 <fadmaa> sandro: disagree
Sandro Hawke: agree ←
11:32:52 <fadmaa> s/disagree/agree/
11:33:08 <sandro> PROPOSED-1: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two government data sources and two humans have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec.
Sandro Hawke: PROPOSED-1: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two government data sources and two humans have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. ←
11:33:50 <MakxDekkers> q+
Makx Dekkers: q+ ←
11:34:05 <PhilA> ack MakxDekkers
Phil Archer: ack MakxDekkers ←
11:34:12 <sandro> PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources (ideally governments) and two humans have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec.
PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources (ideally governments) and two humans have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. ←
11:34:42 <fadmaa> MakxDekkers: what about the terms we are reusing from other vocabularies
Makx Dekkers: what about the terms we are reusing from other vocabularies ←
11:34:46 <cygri> "each term whose use is recommended in the spec"
Richard Cyganiak: "each term whose use is recommended in the spec" ←
11:34:46 <HadleyBeeman> I like that: "ideally government". Keeps us out of the grey areas of who is government and who isn't, and what to do with suppliers hosting on behalf of government, etc.
Hadley Beeman: I like that: "ideally government". Keeps us out of the grey areas of who is government and who isn't, and what to do with suppliers hosting on behalf of government, etc. ←
11:34:55 <fadmaa> ... e.g. the DCTerms reused in DCAT
... e.g. the DCTerms reused in DCAT ←
11:35:02 <sandro> MakxDekkers:Are we only looking at dcat:* or also dc:* stuff that's in DCAT?
Makx Dekkers: Are we only looking at dcat:* or also dc:* stuff that's in DCAT? [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
11:35:17 <fadmaa> PhilA: we are looking at all of the properties
Phil Archer: we are looking at all of the properties ←
11:35:18 <sandro> PhilA: I think we're looking at all of them. Everything used in the diagram.
Phil Archer: I think we're looking at all of them. Everything used in the diagram. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
11:35:37 <sandro> PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources and two humans have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec.
PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources and two humans have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. ←
11:35:52 <fadmaa> q+
q+ ←
11:36:00 <PhilA> ack fadmaa
Phil Archer: ack fadmaa ←
11:36:19 <PhilA> fadmaa: What if someone is using the vocabulary in the wrong way?
Fadi Maali: What if someone is using the vocabulary in the wrong way? [ Scribe Assist by Phil Archer ] ←
11:36:48 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
11:37:25 <fadmaa> sandro: we also have to report on all implementations we are aware of
Sandro Hawke: we also have to report on all implementations we are aware of ←
11:37:29 <PhilA> ack cygri
Phil Archer: ack cygri ←
11:37:33 <HadleyBeeman> q+
Hadley Beeman: q+ ←
11:37:37 <bhyland1> abstain - I think use of each term in 2 different data sources remains a very difficult bar.
Bernadette Hyland: abstain - I think use of each term in 2 different data sources remains a very difficult bar. ←
11:37:53 <sandro> If you don't like this bar, but can live with it, vote "-0" or "0"
Sandro Hawke: If you don't like this bar, but can live with it, vote "-0" or "0" ←
11:38:12 <fadmaa> cygri: I don't like checking conformance by having two humans checking for it
Richard Cyganiak: I don't like checking conformance by having two humans checking for it ←
11:38:46 <fadmaa> ... would it be any two humans?
... would it be any two humans? ←
11:39:01 <fadmaa> sandro: do you want to restrict this to members of the WG?
Sandro Hawke: do you want to restrict this to members of the WG? ←
11:39:06 <fadmaa> cygri: maybe
Richard Cyganiak: maybe ←
11:39:30 <fadmaa> cygri: but I think we need to do the possible automatic checking
Richard Cyganiak: but I think we need to do the possible automatic checking ←
11:39:53 <fadmaa> cygri: this can be done on both the consuming and publishing sides
Richard Cyganiak: this can be done on both the consuming and publishing sides ←
11:40:08 <fadmaa> ... I can write a SPARQL query to check a producer implementation
... I can write a SPARQL query to check a producer implementation ←
11:40:16 <fadmaa> ... for example
... for example ←
11:40:42 <PhilA> q+ To support SPARQL
Phil Archer: q+ To support SPARQL ←
11:40:51 <sandro> PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources and two people (selected by the WG for their expertise) have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. Inspection should use appropriate software tools to assist in their work.
PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources and two people (selected by the WG for their expertise) have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. Inspection should use appropriate software tools to assist in their work. ←
11:41:44 <sandro> this doesn't say whether we will or wont make a test suite.
Sandro Hawke: this doesn't say whether we will or wont make a test suite. ←
11:41:55 <bhyland1> q+
Bernadette Hyland: q+ ←
11:41:56 <sandro> exit criteria is not based on test suite, correct.
Sandro Hawke: exit criteria is not based on test suite, correct. ←
11:42:13 <sandro> I hear cygri volunteering to develop a test suite and tools.....
Sandro Hawke: I hear cygri volunteering to develop a test suite and tools..... ←
11:42:17 <PhilA> ack HadleyBeeman
Phil Archer: ack HadleyBeeman ←
11:42:40 <fadmaa> HadleyBeeman: asking sandro about reporting on all implementations we find
Hadley Beeman: asking sandro about reporting on all implementations we find ←
11:42:51 <fadmaa> ... even the non-compliant ones
... even the non-compliant ones ←
11:42:58 <fadmaa> sandro: I think so
Sandro Hawke: I think so ←
11:43:07 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
11:43:10 <PhilA> ack me
Phil Archer: ack me ←
11:43:10 <Zakim> PhilA, you wanted to support SPARQL
Zakim IRC Bot: PhilA, you wanted to support SPARQL ←
11:43:42 <sandro> sandro: The Transition Request includes an Implementation Report (describing what we know about all implementations)
Sandro Hawke: The Transition Request includes an Implementation Report (describing what we know about all implementations) [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
11:44:07 <fadmaa> PhilA: I agree that there are things we can test and provide results reports. This can be done via SPARQL queries and doesn't necessarily require building tools
Phil Archer: I agree that there are things we can test and provide results reports. This can be done via SPARQL queries and doesn't necessarily require building tools ←
11:44:31 <fadmaa> PhilA: and we publish the SPARQL queries so human reviewers can use that
Phil Archer: and we publish the SPARQL queries so human reviewers can use that ←
11:45:11 <MakxDekkers> by the way, my time is running out.
Makx Dekkers: by the way, my time is running out. ←
11:45:35 <DaveReynolds> q-
Dave Reynolds: q- ←
11:46:01 <sandro> q+ to say yes there is time to build tools
Sandro Hawke: q+ to say yes there is time to build tools ←
11:46:06 <sandro> ack bhyland1
Sandro Hawke: ack bhyland1 ←
11:46:12 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
11:46:15 <fadmaa> bhyland1: practically, given the time restriction, we can't build tools
Bernadette Hyland: practically, given the time restriction, we can't build tools ←
11:46:28 <HadleyBeeman> ack sandro
Hadley Beeman: ack sandro ←
11:46:28 <Zakim> sandro, you wanted to say yes there is time to build tools
Zakim IRC Bot: sandro, you wanted to say yes there is time to build tools ←
11:46:34 <PhilA> PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources and two people (selected by the WG for their expertise) have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. Inspection should use appropriate software tools to assist in their work and will include one or more SPARQL queries that, in the WG's view, SHOULD return useful data from conformant data. Reporting will
PROPOSED: Our Exit Criteria for our Vocabs is: each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources and two people (selected by the WG for their expertise) have inspected each data source and confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. Inspection should use appropriate software tools to assist in their work and will include one or more SPARQL queries that, in the WG's view, SHOULD return useful data from conformant data. Reporting will ←
11:46:34 <PhilA> include any data that doesn't conform as well as that which does.
Phil Archer: include any data that doesn't conform as well as that which does. ←
11:46:54 <fadmaa> ... the best we can do is have people identify implementations and find a practical way to define exit criteria and conformance testing
... the best we can do is have people identify implementations and find a practical way to define exit criteria and conformance testing ←
11:47:57 <PhilA> In our defence m'lud, we did discuss conformance more than 6 months ago, which is closely related.
Phil Archer: In our defence m'lud, we did discuss conformance more than 6 months ago, which is closely related. ←
11:48:01 <fadmaa> bhyland1: discussing tools building should have taken place long time ago
Bernadette Hyland: discussing tools building should have taken place long time ago ←
11:48:23 <fadmaa> cygri: I ask for testcases and not for tools
Richard Cyganiak: I ask for testcases and not for tools ←
11:48:47 <fadmaa> cygri: on the consumer side, testcases are example RDF graphs that uses the vocabularies and others that misuse
Richard Cyganiak: on the consumer side, testcases are example RDF graphs that uses the vocabularies and others that misuse ←
11:49:02 <fadmaa> ... on the producer side, SPARQL queries can be used
... on the producer side, SPARQL queries can be used ←
11:49:36 <fadmaa> ... potentially, the evaluator of some implementation might do some scripting to run queries or load the graphs
... potentially, the evaluator of some implementation might do some scripting to run queries or load the graphs ←
11:49:56 <fadmaa> ... that seams to be smaller burden than writing the testcase
... that seems to be smaller burden than writing the testcase ←
11:50:05 <MakxDekkers> sorry, have to leave now. good luck, talk to you again next week at our regular time.
Makx Dekkers: sorry, have to leave now. good luck, talk to you again next week at our regular time. ←
11:50:18 <fadmaa> s/seams/seems/
11:50:24 <sandro> PROPOSED: We'll build a test suite for each vocab. This will consist of example conforming and non-conforming uses of the vocab, and SPARQL queries which highlight conformance and non-conformance issues.
PROPOSED: We'll build a test suite for each vocab. This will consist of example conforming and non-conforming uses of the vocab, and SPARQL queries which highlight conformance and non-conformance issues. ←
11:51:27 <fadmaa> PhilA: we need to run the SPARQL queries against external data as well not only the ones we created
Phil Archer: we need to run the SPARQL queries against external data as well not only the ones we created ←
11:51:59 <DaveReynolds> q?
Dave Reynolds: q? ←
11:52:16 <bhyland1> ack bhyland
Bernadette Hyland: ack bhyland ←
11:52:33 <fadmaa> cygri: asking for two people to confirm the conformance of some RDF data to a vocabulary is hard to be done
Richard Cyganiak: asking for two people to confirm the conformance of some RDF data to a vocabulary is hard to be done ←
11:52:51 <fadmaa> ... there are cases where you need to be familiar with the reality the data describes
... there are cases where you need to be familiar with the reality the data describes ←
11:53:19 <fadmaa> sandro: do you want to lower that and ask people to run the SPARQL queries on their data?
Sandro Hawke: do you want to lower that and ask people to run the SPARQL queries on their data? ←
11:53:52 <fadmaa> cygri: there is the general issue of how you test an implementation of a vocabulary
Richard Cyganiak: there is the general issue of how you test an implementation of a vocabulary ←
11:54:34 <fadmaa> ... if we have time and resources, how would we do it
... if we have time and resources, how would we do it ←
11:54:52 <fadmaa> ... I'd like to discuss this regardless of time constraints we have
... I'd like to discuss this regardless of time constraints we have ←
11:54:52 <sandro> cygri: I'd to understand how to do it properly, and how well we can do it in the time we have.
Richard Cyganiak: I'd to understand how to do it properly, and how well we can do it in the time we have. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
11:54:54 <HadleyBeeman> q+ Chair interrupt
Hadley Beeman: q+ Chair interrupt ←
11:55:21 <HadleyBeeman> q- chair
Hadley Beeman: q- chair ←
11:55:25 <HadleyBeeman> q- interrupt
Hadley Beeman: q- interrupt ←
11:55:27 <fadmaa> cygri: then moving to discuss a possible compromise giving the WG time constraints
Richard Cyganiak: then moving to discuss a possible compromise giving the WG time constraints ←
11:55:29 <HadleyBeeman> q+ to chair interrupt
Hadley Beeman: q+ to chair interrupt ←
11:55:32 <bhyland1> @PhilA, Agree, we did talk about conformance criteria and we also spoke about 2 ref implementations. However, the penny only dropped (for me) today about what it means for each term in the vocab to be used in at least two data sources by two people.
Bernadette Hyland: @PhilA, Agree, we did talk about conformance criteria and we also spoke about 2 ref implementations. However, the penny only dropped (for me) today about what it means for each term in the vocab to be used in at least two data sources by two people. ←
11:55:47 <PhilA> rrsagent, draft minutes
Phil Archer: rrsagent, draft minutes ←
11:55:47 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA ←
11:55:51 <bhyland1> … Further do we have two people, (selected by the WG for their expertise), who have time to inspect each data source and confirm they are used in conformance to the spec … all in the time we have remaining. I'm trying to be realistic.
Bernadette Hyland: … Further do we have two people, (selected by the WG for their expertise), who have time to inspect each data source and confirm they are used in conformance to the spec … all in the time we have remaining. I'm trying to be realistic. ←
11:56:15 <sandro> test suite, something like: PositiveConsumerTest, NegativeConsumerTest (turtle files) PositiveProducerTest, NegativeConsumerTest (sparql files)
Sandro Hawke: test suite, something like: PositiveConsumerTest, NegativeConsumerTest (turtle files) PositiveProducerTest, NegativeConsumerTest (sparql files) ←
11:56:20 <DaveReynolds> q-
Dave Reynolds: q- ←
11:56:33 <HadleyBeeman> lunch for one hour
Hadley Beeman: lunch for one hour ←
13:00:15 <HadleyBeeman> Shall we come back together?
(No events recorded for 63 minutes)
Hadley Beeman: Shall we come back together? ←
13:00:51 <BartvanLeeuwen> Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom
Bart van Leeuwen: Zakim, call GLDMeetingRoom ←
13:00:51 <Zakim> ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, BartvanLeeuwen; the call is being made ←
13:01:26 <sandro> Zakim, who is on the call?
Sandro Hawke: Zakim, who is on the call? ←
13:01:26 <Zakim> On the phone I see no one
Zakim IRC Bot: On the phone I see no one ←
13:01:38 <BartvanLeeuwen> zakim is still lost
Bart van Leeuwen: zakim is still lost ←
13:04:17 <HadleyBeeman> Topic: Discuss input for http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/ (successor of GLD WG)
13:05:14 <PhilA> http://www.w3.org/2013/02/vrc.html
Phil Archer: http://www.w3.org/2013/02/vrc.html ←
13:06:43 <PhilA> http://www.w3.org/2013/02/vrc.html
Phil Archer: http://www.w3.org/2013/02/vrc.html ←
13:08:13 <fadmaa> PhilA: There is an indication that Rec track might not be the proper way to handle vocabularies.
Phil Archer: There is an indication that Rec track might not be the proper way to handle vocabularies. ←
13:08:18 <sandro> phil: People who want something on schema.org come to public-vocabs@w3.org and suggest it
Phil Archer: People who want something on schema.org come to public-vocabs@w3.org and suggest it [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:09:17 <fadmaa> ... schema.org exists and has its own process of extention
... schema.org exists and has its own process of extention ←
13:09:35 <fadmaa> ... we have the plan to emulate this process
... we have the plan to emulate this process ←
13:10:00 <fadmaa> ... the basic idea is to allow community groups to work on vocabulary. if the work proves successful
... the basic idea is to allow community groups to work on vocabulary. if the work proves successful ←
13:10:47 <fadmaa> ... the community group can submit a vocabulary for official W3C support
... the community group can submit a vocabulary for official W3C support ←
13:10:57 <fadmaa> ... if they can have consensus
... if they can have consensus ←
13:12:21 <fadmaa> PhilA: the upcoming group will be an advisory group not a decision group
Phil Archer: the upcoming group will be an advisory group not a decision group ←
13:13:05 <fadmaa> ... a community group can have a vocabulary under w3.org/ns namespace
... a community group can have a vocabulary under w3.org/ns namespace ←
13:13:15 <fadmaa> ... consistency is a concern
... consistency is a concern ←
13:13:27 <fadmaa> ... deprecation will be allowed but not deletion
... deprecation will be allowed but not deletion ←
13:14:04 <fadmaa> ... if there is no consensus, the reserved namespace can be used for other vocabularies
... if there is no consensus, the reserved namespace can be used for other vocabularies ←
13:14:57 <fadmaa> ... I hope to see multilingualism support in the tool that manages w3.org/ns
... I hope to see multilingualism support in the tool that manages w3.org/ns ←
13:16:24 <sandro> PhilA: We have the multilanguage expertise in the group; it's not hard.
Phil Archer: We have the multilanguage expertise in the group; it's not hard. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
13:16:32 <fadmaa> sandro: in the version one of the tool, it will accept a Turtle file
sandro; in the version one of the tool, it will accept a Turtle file ←
13:16:57 <DeirdreLee> Google hangout is on if anyone wants to join visually
Deirdre Lee: Google hangout is on if anyone wants to join visually ←
13:18:57 <fadmaa> HadleyBeeman: building a validator for vocabulary could be one thing that the vocabulary review committee works on
Hadley Beeman: building a validator for vocabulary could be one thing that the vocabulary review committee works on ←
13:19:29 <fadmaa> BartvanLeeuwen: a validator can be based on a set of SAPRQL queries
Bart van Leeuwen: a validator can be based on a set of SAPRQL queries ←
13:19:47 <fadmaa> PhilA: sounds a better fit of the validation group
Phil Archer: sounds a better fit of the validation group ←
13:19:51 <gatemezi> s/sandro:/sandro;/
13:20:30 <fadmaa> q?
q? ←
13:20:32 <fadmaa> q+
q+ ←
13:20:34 <HadleyBeeman> q-
Hadley Beeman: q- ←
13:21:22 <gatemezi> fadmaa: Is there any limit of scope of the vocab in the new group?
Fadi Maali: Is there any limit of scope of the vocab in the new group? [ Scribe Assist by Ghislain Atemezing ] ←
13:21:49 <fadmaa> fadmaa:wil the group have restriction on the scope of the vocabularies
Fadi Maali: wil the group have restriction on the scope of the vocabularies ←
13:21:56 <fadmaa> PhilA: no
Phil Archer: no ←
13:22:30 <fadmaa> bhyland: external vocabularies deployed on non-production machines frequently cause problems
Bernadette Hyland: external vocabularies deployed on non-production machines frequently cause problems ←
13:22:37 <fadmaa> ... when the machine is down
... when the machine is down ←
13:22:53 <fadmaa> ... having some redundancies to back-up this is very important
... having some redundancies to back-up this is very important ←
13:22:59 <gatemezi> q+
Ghislain Atemezing: q+ ←
13:23:06 <fadmaa> ... ack me
... ack me ←
13:23:10 <fadmaa> ack me
ack me ←
13:24:04 <HadleyBeeman> ack gate
Hadley Beeman: ack gate ←
13:24:05 <fadmaa> gatemezi: LOV currently has a number of versions per vocabularies which are hosted on the OKFN
Ghislain Atemezing: LOV currently has a number of versions per vocabularies which are hosted on the OKFN ←
13:24:36 <fadmaa> ... you always can get a differnet version of the vocabulary if one is unavailable
... you always can get a differnet version of the vocabulary if one is unavailable ←
13:25:43 <gatemezi> ack gatemezin
Ghislain Atemezing: ack gatemezin ←
13:26:05 <fadmaa> bhyland: I suggest also talking to George Thomas who is behind vocab.data.gov
Bernadette Hyland: I suggest also talking to George Thomas who is behind vocab.data.gov ←
13:27:54 <fadmaa> PhilA: there is an increasing need for validation as well.
Phil Archer: there is an increasing need for validation as well. ←
13:28:15 <fadmaa> PhilA: Makx is working on a profile of DCAT that will be recommended to the EC
Phil Archer: Makx is working on a profile of DCAT that will be recommended to the EC ←
13:28:44 <fadmaa> PhilA: a workshop on validation will probably take place on validation
Phil Archer: a workshop on validation will probably take place on validation ←
13:29:19 <bhyland> FWIW, re: VRC - this is a very useful & needed service offering from the W3C and I see huge value/alignment with what is needed for persistence of vocabs & namespace and orgs (starting with US Government ) who should look to W3C for advice on 'how to' and possibly services beyond just strategic advice.
Bernadette Hyland: FWIW, re: VRC - this is a very useful & needed service offering from the W3C and I see huge value/alignment with what is needed for persistence of vocabs & namespace and orgs (starting with US Government ) who should look to W3C for advice on 'how to' and possibly services beyond just strategic advice. ←
13:29:25 <fadmaa> PhilA: in the London workshop next week, we want to break the silos between linked data, Json, and XML worlds
Phil Archer: in the London workshop next week, we want to break the silos between linked data, Json, and XML worlds ←
13:30:29 <fadmaa> PhilA: Horizon 2020 will require funded projects to publish generated data in an open way
Phil Archer: Horizon 2020 will require funded projects to publish generated data in an open way ←
13:32:05 <fadmaa> PhilA: the plan for the subsequent WG is not to be specific neither to linked data nor to government data
Phil Archer: the plan for the subsequent WG is not to be specific neither to linked data nor to government data ←
13:32:12 <fadmaa> ... but open data in general
... but open data in general ←
13:32:29 <fadmaa> ... the workshop next week will provide us more input to help working on the charter
... the workshop next week will provide us more input to help working on the charter ←
13:33:43 <fadmaa> HadleyBeeman: you might want to consider, 1) versioing as it is not solved anywhere yet 2) quality which related to provenance but not only provenance. adding the ability to describe the data quality
Hadley Beeman: you might want to consider, 1) versioing as it is not solved anywhere yet 2) quality which related to provenance but not only provenance. adding the ability to describe the data quality ←
13:34:53 <fadmaa> ... to point out the status of the data quality even when it is not perfect e.g. this data is 95% accurate but be aware that ...
... to point out the status of the data quality even when it is not perfect e.g. this data is 95% accurate but be aware that ... ←
13:35:03 <fadmaa> ... 3) the issue of discovery
... 3) the issue of discovery ←
13:35:17 <HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/2012/Talks/0417-LD-Tutorial/Practice.pdf slide 17
Hadley Beeman: http://www.w3.org/2012/Talks/0417-LD-Tutorial/Practice.pdf slide 17 ←
13:35:19 <sandro> my ears perk up.... discovery of vocabs or of data sources?
Sandro Hawke: my ears perk up.... discovery of vocabs or of data sources? ←
13:36:16 <fadmaa> ... in the early days of the Web, people rely on maintaining lists of good quality web sites in an adhoc manner
... in the early days of the Web, people rely on maintaining lists of good quality web sites in an adhoc manner ←
13:36:32 <fadmaa> ... then search engines changes the scene
... then search engines changes the scene ←
13:36:57 <fadmaa> ... it seems that having a list of datasets sounds similar to the inefficient method of early days of the Web
... it seems that having a list of datasets sounds similar to the inefficient method of early days of the Web ←
13:37:05 <PhilA> See agenda for London http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/agenda#discovery
Phil Archer: See agenda for London http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/agenda#discovery ←
13:38:30 <fadmaa> HadleyBeeman: Dan Brickley will be chairing a panel on discovery during the London workshop
Hadley Beeman: Dan Brickley will be chairing a panel on discovery during the London workshop ←
13:38:43 <HadleyBeeman> s/hadleybeeman/phila
13:40:14 <fadmaa> bhyland asks cygri about the process of populating the LOD cloud
bhyland asks cygri about the process of populating the LOD cloud ←
13:40:46 <fadmaa> cygri: it is a manual process and it doesn't address discovery
Richard Cyganiak: it is a manual process and it doesn't address discovery ←
13:41:20 <fadmaa> ... only parts relevant to the diagram are recorded there
... only parts relevant to the diagram are recorded there ←
13:42:01 <bhyland> agenda + for future GLD WG mtg - topic: discovery of LOD datasets starting with process Richard & Anja started in 2007
Bernadette Hyland: agenda + for future GLD WG mtg - topic: discovery of LOD datasets starting with process Richard & Anja started in 2007 ←
13:43:26 <bhyland> NB: Open Data on the Web agenda, see http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/
Scribe problem: the name 'NB' does not match any of the 72 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Agis Papantoniou Aitor Moreno Anne Washington Asunción Gómez Pérez Bart van Leeuwen Bede McCall Benedikt Kaempgen Bernadette Hyland Biplav Srivastava Boris Villazón-Terrazas Caroline Burle Chris Beer Chris Musialek Christophe Gueret Cory Casanave Daniel Mekonnen Daniel Vila Dave Reynolds David Smith David Price Deirdre Lee Denise Warzel Dickson Lukose Elena Montiel Ponsoda Eric VonColln Eric Stephan Fadi Maali George Thomas Gerald Steeman Ghislain Atemezing Giancarlo Guizzardi Gofran Shukair Hadley Beeman Irene Polikoff James McKinney Jindřich Mynarz Joao Almeida John Goodwin John Sheridan John Erickson Jorge Gracia Luis Bermudez Lyle Burgoon Makx Dekkers Maria Fernandez Ruiz Marios Meimaris Martin Kaltenböck Martín Álvarez Michael Pendleton Mohamed ZERGAOUI Naomi Yoshizawa Phil Archer Pierre Andrews Raf Buyle Raj Singh Raphaël Troncy Richard Cyganiak Sandro Hawke Sarven Capadisli Serafin Olcoz Stasinos Konstantopoulos Ted Thibodeau Tina Gheen Tope Omitola William Brafford Yaso Córdova Yigal Arens Yosuke Funahashi Zachary Whitley Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot
Unknown NB: Open Data on the Web agenda, see http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/ [ Scribe Assist by Bernadette Hyland ] ←
13:43:48 <fadmaa> BartvanLeeuwen: I think there is much focus on the publication side of open and linked data but not on the consumption
Bart van Leeuwen: I think there is much focus on the publication side of open and linked data but not on the consumption ←
13:44:02 <fadmaa> ... especially within the government itself
... especially within the government itself ←
13:44:18 <fadmaa> PhilA: we had a workshop last year on use of open data
Phil Archer: we had a workshop last year on use of open data ←
13:45:08 <cygri> q?
Richard Cyganiak: q? ←
13:45:21 <fadmaa> ... we are working on that within project proposals and planned workshops
... we are working on that within project proposals and planned workshops ←
13:45:48 <fadmaa> PhilA: ... one of them is called "the business of open data"
Phil Archer: ... one of them is called "the business of open data" ←
13:46:36 <fadmaa> BartvanLeeuwen: I am interested in consumption in general not necessarily making money out of data
Bart van Leeuwen: I am interested in consumption in general not necessarily making money out of data ←
13:46:38 <PhilA> The business of open data http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/agenda#bus
Phil Archer: The business of open data http://www.w3.org/2013/04/odw/agenda#bus ←
13:46:53 <fadmaa> ... I am aware of a number of duplicated offers within government
... I am aware of a number of duplicated offers within government ←
13:47:53 <fadmaa> cygri: what would the expected output, in terms of W3C recommendations, of the group be?
Richard Cyganiak: what would the expected output, in terms of W3C recommendations, of the group be? ←
13:48:22 <fadmaa> ... open data is a broad topic and it will be challenging to get consensus about what set of documents this group will produce
... open data is a broad topic and it will be challenging to get consensus about what set of documents this group will produce ←
13:48:37 <BartvanLeeuwen> q?
Bart van Leeuwen: q? ←
13:49:19 <Zakim> restarting Zakim-bot in 5 minutes to recover bridge state
Zakim IRC Bot: restarting Zakim-bot in 5 minutes to recover bridge state ←
13:49:36 <fadmaa> ... we have experienced this to a certain degree in this group (vocabs, directory, best practices).
... we have experienced this to a certain degree in this group (vocabs, directory, best practices). ←
13:50:22 <fadmaa> cygri: with broad scope, It is challenging to sustain sufficient resources for all planned results
Richard Cyganiak: with broad scope, It is challenging to sustain sufficient resources for all planned results ←
13:51:58 <fadmaa> cygri: It is helpful to havie strands of works so that people can join the WG and work on a particular strand
Richard Cyganiak: It is helpful to have strands of works so that people can join the WG and work on a particular strand ←
13:52:11 <fadmaa> s/havie/have/
13:53:19 <fadmaa> PhilA: it is generally hard to sustain interest within working groups
Phil Archer: it is generally hard to sustain interest within working groups ←
13:53:30 <PhilA> Possible topics for the new WG
Phil Archer: Possible topics for the new WG ←
13:53:32 <PhilA> Open Data WG Charter notes
Phil Archer: Open Data WG Charter notes ←
13:53:32 <PhilA> Head for Persistent URI Recommendation
Phil Archer: Head for Persistent URI Recommendation ←
13:53:32 <PhilA> - Input from GLD BPs
Phil Archer: - Input from GLD BPs ←
13:53:32 <PhilA> - Input from UKGovLD
Phil Archer: - Input from UKGovLD ←
13:53:32 <PhilA> - Other policies, such as Dutch
Phil Archer: - Other policies, such as Dutch ←
13:53:32 <PhilA> - Identify an differences in sectors, e.g. government, enterprise, retail
Phil Archer: - Identify an differences in sectors, e.g. government, enterprise, retail ←
13:53:32 <PhilA> Guidance on what it means to conformance to a vocabulary.
Phil Archer: Guidance on what it means to conformance to a vocabulary. ←
13:53:33 <PhilA> Description language for APIs? Ref DCAT discussion.
Phil Archer: Description language for APIs? Ref DCAT discussion. ←
13:53:33 <PhilA> Granularity vocabularies - frequency of updates, scale of map etc. ?
Phil Archer: Granularity vocabularies - frequency of updates, scale of map etc. ? ←
13:53:33 <PhilA> Versioning?
Phil Archer: Versioning? ←
13:53:33 <PhilA> Publishing vocabs, clickable diagrams? schema -> SVG
Phil Archer: Publishing vocabs, clickable diagrams? schema -> SVG ←
13:53:33 <PhilA> From UKGovCamp...
Phil Archer: From UKGovCamp... ←
13:53:34 <PhilA> Versioning, new version of old data
Phil Archer: Versioning, new version of old data ←
13:53:35 <PhilA> Corrections to existing
Phil Archer: Corrections to existing ←
13:53:36 <PhilA> Quality related to provenance. Not the same as prov. It's not perfect but here it is.
Phil Archer: Quality related to provenance. Not the same as prov. It's not perfect but here it is. ←
13:53:37 <PhilA> Discovery. We're still in the midset of repositories, lists. Indexing? DCAT?
Phil Archer: Discovery. We're still in the midset of repositories, lists. Indexing? DCAT? ←
13:53:38 <PhilA> Barrier is not being able to find the data you need.
Phil Archer: Barrier is not being able to find the data you need. ←
13:53:39 <PhilA> Automatic generation of something like the LOD cloud.
Phil Archer: Automatic generation of something like the LOD cloud. ←
13:54:50 <Zakim> restarting Zakim-bot to recover bridge state
Zakim IRC Bot: restarting Zakim-bot to recover bridge state ←
13:55:10 <fadmaa> HadleyBeeman: maybe also APIs for usage of personal data
Hadley Beeman: maybe also APIs for usage of personal data ←
13:55:37 <fadmaa> BartvanLeeuwen: I agree this is a hot topic
Bart van Leeuwen: I agree this is a hot topic ←
13:57:49 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
13:57:49 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc#T13-57-49
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc#T13-57-49 ←
13:58:23 <fadmaa> cygri: who do you expect to join?
Richard Cyganiak: who do you expect to join? ←
13:58:53 <fadmaa> PhilA: when drafting the charter will keep in mind who will be interested to do something not only whether it is interesting or not
Phil Archer: when drafting the charter will keep in mind who will be interested to do something not only whether it is interesting or not ←
13:59:34 <HadleyBeeman> zakim, this is gld
Hadley Beeman: zakim, this is gld ←
13:59:34 <Zakim> ok, HadleyBeeman; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM
Zakim IRC Bot: ok, HadleyBeeman; that matches T&S_(GLD)3:00AM ←
13:59:50 <fadmaa> bhyland: the workshop will help clarify possible interest and topics
Bernadette Hyland: the workshop will help clarify possible interest and topics ←
14:01:42 <fadmaa> TOPIC: CR exit criteria
14:02:31 <HadleyBeeman> topic: CR exit criteria (part 2)
14:02:41 <HadleyBeeman> From before lunch… cygri: there is the general issue of how you test an implementation of a vocabulary
Hadley Beeman: From before lunch… cygri: there is the general issue of how you test an implementation of a vocabulary ←
14:03:02 <HadleyBeeman> (and from before) cygri: I'd to understand how to do it properly, and how well we can do it in the time we have.
Hadley Beeman: (and from before) cygri: I'd to understand how to do it properly, and how well we can do it in the time we have. ←
14:03:19 <HadleyBeeman> 5 min break
Hadley Beeman: 5 min break ←
14:14:13 <HadleyBeeman> Aaaand… we're back.
(No events recorded for 10 minutes)
Hadley Beeman: Aaaand… we're back. ←
14:15:03 <PhilA> scribe: PhilA
(Scribe set to Phil Archer)
14:15:11 <PhilA> scribeNick: PhilA
14:15:34 <PhilA> Topic: CR Exit Criteria (conclusion)
14:15:54 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: We started to talk about how we can test our vocabs... Bart?
Hadley Beeman: We started to talk about how we can test our vocabs... Bart? ←
14:16:28 <PhilA> BartvanLeeuwen: Richard said before lunch that we could create some queries that could be used by people to evaluate whether data has used the vocabulary properly
Bart van Leeuwen: Richard said before lunch that we could create some queries that could be used by people to evaluate whether data has used the vocabulary properly ←
14:16:57 <PhilA> ... we thought over lunch that it shouldn't be too hard to create a Web service that would run queries against data
... we thought over lunch that it shouldn't be too hard to create a Web service that would run queries against data ←
14:17:06 <DaveReynolds> WG shouldn't set up test server, should be done by implementation reporters
Dave Reynolds: WG shouldn't set up test server, should be done by implementation reporters ←
14:17:12 <PhilA> ... with the proviso that the editors should provide the SPARQL queries
... with the proviso that the editors should provide the SPARQL queries ←
14:17:40 <PhilA> BartvanLeeuwen: And then after the GLD, maybe a future WG could take this on to generalise it
Bart van Leeuwen: And then after the GLD, maybe a future WG could take this on to generalise it ←
14:18:04 <PhilA> BartvanLeeuwen: So something like "this SPARQL query should list your organisations and the people within them"
Bart van Leeuwen: So something like "this SPARQL query should list your organisations and the people within them" ←
14:18:39 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: Are the implementation reports not all WG members?
Hadley Beeman: Are the implementation reports not all WG members? ←
14:18:44 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: Ideally not
Dave Reynolds: Ideally not ←
14:19:16 <PhilA> bhyland: Who would run the tests?
Bernadette Hyland: Who would run the tests? ←
14:19:29 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: For ORG we have several (UK, IT, EL etc.)
Dave Reynolds: For ORG we have several (UK, IT, EL etc.) ←
14:19:40 <HadleyBeeman> draft table http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition
Hadley Beeman: draft table http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition ←
14:20:00 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: For that point Dave that table above can be tailored to the specific example
Hadley Beeman: For that point Dave that table above can be tailored to the specific example ←
14:20:21 <PhilA> cygri: I don't see where automation is necessary
Richard Cyganiak: I don't see where automation is necessary ←
14:20:50 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: You need a way of people saying that a given term has been tested
Dave Reynolds: You need a way of people saying that a given term has been tested ←
14:21:14 <PhilA> cygri: With our vocabs we could probbaly do it manually as the vocabs are so small
Richard Cyganiak: With our vocabs we could probbaly do it manually as the vocabs are so small ←
14:21:39 <PhilA> rrsagent, draft minutes
rrsagent, draft minutes ←
14:21:39 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA ←
14:22:05 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: One clarification - implementation reports get you from CR to PR, not into CR
Dave Reynolds: One clarification - implementation reports get you from CR to PR, not into CR ←
14:22:16 <PhilA> sandro: We're supposed to mention any examples when we go into CR
Sandro Hawke: We're supposed to mention any examples when we go into CR ←
14:22:37 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: The list I have there comes from the process Doc
Hadley Beeman: The list I have there comes from the process Doc ←
14:23:10 <HadleyBeeman> "Are there any implementation requirements beyond the defaults of the Process Document? For instance, is the expectation to show two complete implementations (e.g., there are two software instances, each of which conforms) or to show that each feature is implemented twice in some piece of software?"
Hadley Beeman: "Are there any implementation requirements beyond the defaults of the Process Document? For instance, is the expectation to show two complete implementations (e.g., there are two software instances, each of which conforms) or to show that each feature is implemented twice in some piece of software?" ←
14:23:16 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: Having said that... hang on. We need to express any deviation from the standard ones in the process doc
Hadley Beeman: Having said that... hang on. We need to express any deviation from the standard ones in the process doc ←
14:23:27 <PhilA> ... we have to say what we will be showing, not what we can show now
... we have to say what we will be showing, not what we can show now ←
14:23:27 <DaveReynolds> To quote from Sandro's email "Is there a preliminary implementation report? The implementation report should be a detailed matrix showing which software implements each feature of the specification."
Dave Reynolds: To quote from Sandro's email "Is there a preliminary implementation report? The implementation report should be a detailed matrix showing which software implements each feature of the specification." ←
14:23:56 <DaveReynolds> I'm saying we should list known implementations but not provide a preliminary implementation report at CR transition.
Dave Reynolds: I'm saying we should list known implementations but not provide a preliminary implementation report at CR transition. ←
14:24:02 <PhilA> cygri: If we want to create a test suite and base the exit criteria on that, then what we have to do now is to create the tests
Richard Cyganiak: If we want to create a test suite and base the exit criteria on that, then what we have to do now is to create the tests ←
14:24:19 <PhilA> cygri: Then to get from CR to PR we need implementations that pass 9at least 2 or whatever we specify)
Richard Cyganiak: Then to get from CR to PR we need implementations that pass (at least 2 or whatever we specify) ←
14:24:24 <PhilA> s/9/(
14:24:47 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: So we need to lay out our exit criteria and our methodology
Hadley Beeman: So we need to lay out our exit criteria and our methodology ←
14:25:11 <PhilA> cygri: We can also say now that we know about implementation A, B and C...
Richard Cyganiak: We can also say now that we know about implementation A, B and C... ←
14:26:13 <sandro> +1 DaveReynolds WG members don't have to do any testing.
Sandro Hawke: +1 DaveReynolds WG members don't have to do any testing. ←
14:26:16 <bhyland> q+
Bernadette Hyland: q+ ←
14:26:17 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: This worries me. Other WGs don't do testing, they provide tools for implementors to do the tests
Dave Reynolds: This worries me. Other WGs don't do testing, they provide tools for implementors to do the tests ←
14:26:37 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: That makes sense to me. And removes some of the burden from us
Hadley Beeman: That makes sense to me. And removes some of the burden from us ←
14:26:55 <PhilA> cygri: So if there is a broken implementation, that doesn't create a probelm from a process POV
Richard Cyganiak: So if there is a broken implementation, that doesn't create a probelm from a process POV ←
14:27:07 <HadleyBeeman> ack bhy
Hadley Beeman: ack bhy ←
14:27:16 <PhilA> cygri: if someone else has got it wrong then that shouldn't derail the problem
Richard Cyganiak: if someone else has got it wrong then that shouldn't derail the process ←
14:27:27 <PhilA> s/problem/process/
14:27:46 <PhilA> bhyland: What's the incentive to run the tests?
Bernadette Hyland: What's the incentive to run the tests? ←
14:28:13 <PhilA> cygri: Because the publishers want to promote the fact that they conform to the stnandard
Richard Cyganiak: Because the publishers want to promote the fact that they conform to the stnandard ←
14:28:35 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
14:28:49 <PhilA> cygri: looking back to RDB2RDF test suite, people started using it as soon as we published it
Richard Cyganiak: looking back to RDB2RDF test suite, people started using it as soon as we published it ←
14:30:02 <PhilA> cygri: I don't know if it's governments that will do this, it could be others
Richard Cyganiak: I don't know if it's governments that will do this, it could be others ←
14:30:04 <PhilA> q+
q+ ←
14:30:21 <PhilA> bhyland: I think it will take a little out reach on the part of the WG
Bernadette Hyland: I think it will take a little out reach on the part of the WG ←
14:30:30 <PhilA> bhyland: It's not trivial or insignificant
Bernadette Hyland: It's not trivial or insignificant ←
14:31:04 <DaveReynolds> ack me
Dave Reynolds: ack me ←
14:31:12 <PhilA> sandro: Quick story - SPARQL was stuck on some bits that no one was interested to do. The I saw someone at a conference and a day later it was done...
Sandro Hawke: Quick story - SPARQL was stuck on some bits that no one was interested to do. The I saw someone at a conference and a day later it was done... ←
14:31:51 <HadleyBeeman> scribe:hadleybeeman
(Scribe set to Hadley Beeman)
14:32:41 <HadleyBeeman> bhyland: we should have an action item on this, one of us do the outreach of finding people to run implementation reports on their implementations for us
Bernadette Hyland: we should have an action item on this, one of us do the outreach of finding people to run implementation reports on their implementations for us ←
14:33:16 <HadleyBeeman> phila: PwC will want to run tests against ORG and DCAT, for example
Phil Archer: PwC will want to run tests against ORG and DCAT, for example ←
14:33:42 <HadleyBeeman> q?
q? ←
14:33:45 <HadleyBeeman> ack phila
ack phila ←
14:33:50 <HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations
http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations ←
14:34:52 <HadleyBeeman> cygri: the last bullet point is the most interesting one (re metrics to show that stuff has been implemented).
Richard Cyganiak: the last bullet point is the most interesting one (re metrics to show that stuff has been implemented). ←
14:35:12 <PhilA2> scribe: PhilA2
(Scribe set to Phil Archer)
14:35:30 <PhilA> scribe: PhilA
14:35:37 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: So are we happy with the proposal?
Hadley Beeman: So are we happy with the proposal? ←
14:35:48 <PhilA> cygri: I'm not particularly happy with it
Richard Cyganiak: I'm not particularly happy with it ←
14:36:11 <PhilA> cygri: I think we should make an attempt to create some test data
Richard Cyganiak: I think we should make an attempt to create some test data ←
14:37:09 <PhilA> rrsagent, draft minutes
rrsagent, draft minutes ←
14:37:09 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA ←
14:38:04 <sandro> (Earlier Test-Suite )PROPOSED: We'll build a test suite for each vocab. This will consist of example conforming and non-conforming uses of the vocab, and SPARQL queries which highlight conformance and non-conformance issues.
Sandro Hawke: (Earlier Test-Suite )PROPOSED: We'll build a test suite for each vocab. This will consist of example conforming and non-conforming uses of the vocab, and SPARQL queries which highlight conformance and non-conformance issues. ←
14:39:29 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: My comment was about QB. It doesn't fit this pattern. I don't want people to run a server that people could run 1 million triples in QB when some queries are quadratic or more
Dave Reynolds: My comment was about QB. It doesn't fit this pattern. I don't want people to run a server that people could run 1 million triples in QB when some queries are quadratic or more ←
14:39:51 <PhilA> bhyland: So QBG is a unique animal. But Hadley has put together a template that seems to work well
Bernadette Hyland: So QBG is a unique animal. But Hadley has put together a template that seems to work well ←
14:40:21 <PhilA> The burden of http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition should not be on the WG members to do the test, but someone does need to facilitate recording the test result in the page
The burden of http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition should not be on the WG members to do the test, but someone does need to facilitate recording the test result in the page ←
14:40:47 <PhilA> bhyland: Someone needs to take an action item to facilitate the testing of each vocab
Bernadette Hyland: Someone needs to take an action item to facilitate the testing of each vocab ←
14:41:01 <PhilA> cygri: Creating the test data is not trivial
Richard Cyganiak: Creating the test data is not trivial ←
14:41:15 <PhilA> cygri: Asking people to run the tests aginst their data is mino
Richard Cyganiak: Asking people to run the tests aginst their data is mino ←
14:41:31 <PhilA> cygri: By committing to creating a test suite we create a significant amount of work
Richard Cyganiak: By committing to creating a test suite we create a significant amount of work ←
14:41:46 <PhilA> bhyland: Yes, that's why I think the bar is high and I'm abstainin
Bernadette Hyland: Yes, that's why I think the bar is high and I'm abstainin ←
14:42:03 <PhilA> bhyland: But Bart said he could build a service
Bernadette Hyland: But Bart said he could build a service ←
14:42:16 <PhilA> BartvanLeeuwen: Yep, I can host a service but the editors need to create the SPARQL queries
Bart van Leeuwen: Yep, I can host a service but the editors need to create the SPARQL queries ←
14:42:41 <PhilA> bhyland: Not sure we're going to resolve this today, but it's clearly an issue
Bernadette Hyland: Not sure we're going to resolve this today, but it's clearly an issue ←
14:43:00 <PhilA> sandro: I think we should try and decide
Sandro Hawke: I think we should try and decide ←
14:43:06 <PhilA> bhyland: I agree there's an urgency
Bernadette Hyland: I agree there's an urgency ←
14:43:49 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
14:43:50 <PhilA> sandro: I think there's consensus, if not enthusiasm, that we can do the human comparison thing
Sandro Hawke: I think there's consensus, if not enthusiasm, that we can do the human comparison thing ←
14:44:09 <PhilA> cygri: I have to disagree here. The exit criteria about 2 humans checking doesn't work for me
Richard Cyganiak: I have to disagree here. The exit criteria about 2 humans checking doesn't work for me ←
14:44:36 <PhilA> cygri: It's very subjective and it eitehr puts the burden on the Wg to do that or it puts the burden on the implementers
Richard Cyganiak: It's very subjective and it eitehr puts the burden on the Wg to do that or it puts the burden on the implementers ←
14:44:47 <PhilA> ... asking them to assert that their data conforms is too low a bar
... asking them to assert that their data conforms is too low a bar ←
14:44:55 <PhilA> .... not happy
.... not happy ←
14:45:23 <PhilA> sandro: I see the editors doing this but not with reading millions of triples
Sandro Hawke: I see the editors doing this but not with reading millions of triples ←
14:45:31 <PhilA> q+
q+ ←
14:45:41 <PhilA> ack DaveReynolds
ack DaveReynolds ←
14:45:42 <cygri> q+
Richard Cyganiak: q+ ←
14:46:00 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: I think I may be seconded with what Richard said.
Dave Reynolds: I think I may be seconded with what Richard said. ←
14:46:11 <PhilA> ... who are those humans and what are their criteria
... who are those humans and what are their criteria ←
14:46:18 <PhilA> ... the danger is that the humans are me and Richard
... the danger is that the humans are me and Richard ←
14:46:42 <PhilA> ... I took a lot of time interpreting the conformance constraints for QB...
... I took a lot of time interpreting the conformance constraints for QB... ←
14:47:14 <PhilA> ... manbe there are some queries that we could write that would check for obvious problems
... manbe there are some queries that we could write that would check for obvious problems ←
14:47:35 <PhilA> ... an unbounded amount of work is not good, no work isn't enough
... an unbounded amount of work is not good, no work isn't enough ←
14:48:19 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: So would it help you and Richard to keep in our WG advice that the inspection and confirmation process should be defined and documented case by case by the editors
Hadley Beeman: So would it help you and Richard to keep in our WG advice that the inspection and confirmation process should be defined and documented case by case by the editors ←
14:48:39 <cygri> q?
Richard Cyganiak: q? ←
14:48:53 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: I'm trying to put enough in the text to allow us to move forward without being too restrictive
Hadley Beeman: I'm trying to put enough in the text to allow us to move forward without being too restrictive ←
14:49:34 <HadleyBeeman> I'm suggesting we agree that the exact methodology to confirm each vocabulary is left to the editors to work out. They will find some combination of objective testing (e.g., SPARQL queries) and some subjective checking, as resources permit.
Hadley Beeman: I'm suggesting we agree that the exact methodology to confirm each vocabulary is left to the editors to work out. They will find some combination of objective testing (e.g., SPARQL queries) and some subjective checking, as resources permit. ←
14:50:47 <PhilA> PhilA: I've built a validator forJoinup's ADMS profile
Phil Archer: I've built a validator forJoinup's ADMS profile ←
14:50:58 <PhilA> cygri: You can't give a complete test
Richard Cyganiak: You can't give a complete test ←
14:51:09 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: But you can sample
Hadley Beeman: But you can sample ←
14:51:15 <PhilA> cygri: Yes
Richard Cyganiak: Yes ←
14:51:25 <DeirdreLee> q+
Deirdre Lee: q+ ←
14:51:34 <PhilA> cygri: I agree that we need a mix of using a test suite and a human
Richard Cyganiak: I agree that we need a mix of using a test suite and a human ←
14:51:38 <PhilA> q-
q- ←
14:52:43 <PhilA> cygri: So regarding the manual inspection and confirming that they conform... it would be good to write a script that the tester could use to spot specific errors, and we should publish that as part of our documentation
Richard Cyganiak: So regarding the manual inspection and confirming that they conform... it would be good to write a script that the tester could use to spot specific errors, and we should publish that as part of our documentation ←
14:53:03 <PhilA> cygri: if we're doing a good job then we could perhaps ask implementers to do this themselves.
Richard Cyganiak: if we're doing a good job then we could perhaps ask implementers to do this themselves. ←
14:53:23 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
14:53:38 <PhilA> ... that would shift the burden. I'd rather write a checklist for others to use rather than check an unlimited number of data sets
... that would shift the burden. I'd rather write a checklist for others to use rather than check an unlimited number of data sets ←
14:53:58 <PhilA> DeirdreLee: Would it be possible to use Gofran's tester that tests interoperability tester?
Deirdre Lee: Would it be possible to use Gofran's tester that tests interoperability tester? ←
14:54:14 <HadleyBeeman> q?
Hadley Beeman: q? ←
14:54:19 <HadleyBeeman> ack cygri
Hadley Beeman: ack cygri ←
14:54:21 <HadleyBeeman> ack deirdre
Hadley Beeman: ack deirdre ←
14:54:33 <DeirdreLee> ack DeirdreLee
Deirdre Lee: ack DeirdreLee ←
14:54:59 <PhilA> fadmaa: I know it makes some assumptions about the communication that may not be valid
Fadi Maali: I know it makes some assumptions about the communication that may not be valid ←
14:55:03 <PhilA> ack DaveReynolds
ack DaveReynolds ←
14:55:38 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: One of the things you want in the implementation report is a report on "we found it easy to use..." and we saw no use for ... etc
Dave Reynolds: One of the things you want in the implementation report is a report on "we found it easy to use..." and we saw no use for ... etc ←
14:55:46 <PhilA> ... that's what's helpful
... that's what's helpful ←
14:56:07 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: I think we should include the means to add some descriptive text
Dave Reynolds: I think we should include the means to add some descriptive text ←
14:56:22 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: I think I'd find that more useful than eyeballs on triples
Dave Reynolds: I think I'd find that more useful than eyeballs on triples ←
14:56:29 <HadleyBeeman> q+
Hadley Beeman: q+ ←
14:56:34 <PhilA> cygri: Checking whether terms have been used at all can be automated
Richard Cyganiak: Checking whether terms have been used at all can be automated ←
14:57:30 <PhilA> cygri: Commenting on the usability or usefulness... are there examples of others who have done
Richard Cyganiak: Commenting on the usability or usefulness... are there examples of others who have done ←
14:57:33 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds: written feedback from implementers seems to me to be an important feature of implementation reports, what was hard to understand, what was useful, what didn't have value
Dave Reynolds: written feedback from implementers seems to me to be an important feature of implementation reports, what was hard to understand, what was useful, what didn't have value [ Scribe Assist by Dave Reynolds ] ←
14:57:44 <PhilA> +1 to DaveReynolds
+1 to DaveReynolds ←
14:57:58 <PhilA> DeirdreLee: Wouldn't that be the same as the comments from LC
Deirdre Lee: Wouldn't that be the same as the comments from LC ←
14:58:00 <PhilA> PhilA: Yes
Phil Archer: Yes ←
14:58:29 <PhilA> cygri: The difference about CR is that we want to know how it was actually used, not just thought about
Richard Cyganiak: The difference about CR is that we want to know how it was actually used, not just thought about ←
14:58:34 <PhilA> ack HadleyBeeman
ack HadleyBeeman ←
14:58:45 <HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations
Hadley Beeman: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations ←
14:59:59 <PhilA> cygri: I'm thinking of some sort of script that we want implementers to work through. That shifts the burden from the nebulous 2 humans to the implementers
Richard Cyganiak: I'm thinking of some sort of script that we want implementers to work through. That shifts the burden from the nebulous 2 humans to the implementers ←
15:00:12 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: proposes revised text...
Hadley Beeman: proposes revised text... ←
15:00:16 <HadleyBeeman> proposes: Each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources (ideally governments) and, using the test methodology, inspected each data source and
Scribe problem: the name 'proposes' does not match any of the 72 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Agis Papantoniou Aitor Moreno Anne Washington Asunción Gómez Pérez Bart van Leeuwen Bede McCall Benedikt Kaempgen Bernadette Hyland Biplav Srivastava Boris Villazón-Terrazas Caroline Burle Chris Beer Chris Musialek Christophe Gueret Cory Casanave Daniel Mekonnen Daniel Vila Dave Reynolds David Smith David Price Deirdre Lee Denise Warzel Dickson Lukose Elena Montiel Ponsoda Eric VonColln Eric Stephan Fadi Maali George Thomas Gerald Steeman Ghislain Atemezing Giancarlo Guizzardi Gofran Shukair Hadley Beeman Irene Polikoff James McKinney Jindřich Mynarz Joao Almeida John Goodwin John Sheridan John Erickson Jorge Gracia Luis Bermudez Lyle Burgoon Makx Dekkers Maria Fernandez Ruiz Marios Meimaris Martin Kaltenböck Martín Álvarez Michael Pendleton Mohamed ZERGAOUI Naomi Yoshizawa Phil Archer Pierre Andrews Raf Buyle Raj Singh Raphaël Troncy Richard Cyganiak Sandro Hawke Sarven Capadisli Serafin Olcoz Stasinos Konstantopoulos Ted Thibodeau Tina Gheen Tope Omitola William Brafford Yaso Córdova Yigal Arens Yosuke Funahashi Zachary Whitley Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot
Unknown proposes: Each term in the vocab used in at least two data sources (ideally governments) and, using the test methodology, inspected each data source and [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
15:00:16 <HadleyBeeman> confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec.
Hadley Beeman: confirmed they are used in conformance to the spec. ←
15:03:45 <HadleyBeeman> q?
Hadley Beeman: q? ←
15:04:49 <PhilA> cygri: Org is the one where we're hitting these things first
Richard Cyganiak: Org is the one where we're hitting these things first ←
15:05:03 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: No... the current timetable has Org and QB at the same time
Dave Reynolds: No... the current timetable has Org and QB at the same time ←
15:05:26 <PhilA> cygri: I hear consensus on having SPARQL queries for each vocab
Richard Cyganiak: I hear consensus on having SPARQL queries for each vocab ←
15:05:55 <PhilA> cygri: These are about chekcing conformance on the publishing side. Do we need to worry about the consumer side as well
Richard Cyganiak: These are about chekcing conformance on the publishing side. Do we need to worry about the consumer side as well ←
15:07:52 <DaveReynolds> Data for unit tests are different from data from system tests
Dave Reynolds: Data for unit tests are different for data for system tests ←
15:07:58 <DaveReynolds> s/from/for/
15:08:07 <HadleyBeeman> PhilA: creating the SPARQL query alone will force the tester to create conformant and non-conformant data. That creates a reasonable test suite, useful for publishers and consumers.
Phil Archer: creating the SPARQL query alone will force the tester to create conformant and non-conformant data. That creates a reasonable test suite, useful for publishers and consumers. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
15:08:21 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
15:08:28 <PhilA> ack DaveReynolds
ack DaveReynolds ←
15:08:30 <HadleyBeeman> PhilA: It'd be nice to get implementation reports from consuming applications, but not necessary for our exit criteria.
Phil Archer: It'd be nice to get implementation reports from consuming applications, but not necessary for our exit criteria. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
15:09:11 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: I think it's a binary decision on whether we have to test consumers. We need to be clear whether we're including them or not
Dave Reynolds: I think it's a binary decision on whether we have to test consumers. We need to be clear whether we're including them or not ←
15:09:38 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: It's not a trivial side efeect, or it certainly wasn't for QB
Dave Reynolds: It's not a trivial side efeect, or it certainly wasn't for QB ←
15:09:58 <PhilA> cygri: That's right for QB, yes, but for Org it can be much simpler
Richard Cyganiak: That's right for QB, yes, but for Org it can be much simpler ←
15:10:11 <PhilA> cygri: A well formed Cube is a much more complicated structure
Richard Cyganiak: A well formed Cube is a much more complicated structure ←
15:10:39 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: true - but I didn't need to create a test for every aspect of it
Dave Reynolds: true - but I didn't need to create a test for every aspect of it ←
15:10:55 <PhilA> cygri: No one suggests that the queries or the test data shoujld provide complete coverage
Richard Cyganiak: No one suggests that the queries or the test data shoujld provide complete coverage ←
15:11:22 <PhilA> ... we prob want data in the reports that tell us whether each term has been sued but we don't need a test for it
... we prob want data in the reports that tell us whether each term has been used but we don't need a test for it ←
15:11:29 <PhilA> s/sued/used/
15:11:49 <PhilA> cygri: It's not necessary to cover everything. It is useful to cover most of it
Richard Cyganiak: It's not necessary to cover everything. It is useful to cover most of it ←
15:12:25 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: You were talking about the queries (the 80/20 thing). does that also apply to the human review?
Hadley Beeman: You were talking about the queries (the 80/20 thing). does that also apply to the human review? ←
15:13:00 <PhilA> cygri: If you show me an RDF graph and asked is this conformant. I'd take a look and eventually come up with an answer but it may be hard to come up with an explanataion
Richard Cyganiak: If you show me an RDF graph and asked is this conformant. I'd take a look and eventually come up with an answer but it may be hard to come up with an explanataion ←
15:13:15 <PhilA> ... is it using the right properties? is it extending it correctly?
... is it using the right properties? is it extending it correctly? ←
15:13:27 <PhilA> ... I don't know how I'd quantify my thinking
... I don't know how I'd quantify my thinking ←
15:13:47 <PhilA> cygri: I'm suggesting a script or checklist
Richard Cyganiak: I'm suggesting a script or checklist ←
15:13:55 <PhilA> ... with binary answers
... with binary answers ←
15:14:23 <PhilA> ... some questions might be like "are there any terms with the same semantics as an org term?"
... some questions might be like "are there any terms with the same semantics as an org term?" ←
15:14:45 <HadleyBeeman> q?
Hadley Beeman: q? ←
15:14:48 <PhilA> ... some inspectors will be more thorough?
... some inspectors will be more thorough? ←
15:15:27 <HadleyBeeman> Can we look at this again? http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations
Hadley Beeman: Can we look at this again? http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations ←
15:18:15 <PhilA> cygri: Will we have a test for every term?
Richard Cyganiak: Will we have a test for every term? ←
15:18:26 <PhilA> cygri: Each term is used by at least 2 data sources
Richard Cyganiak: Each term is used by at least 2 data sources ←
15:18:41 <PhilA> cygri: There are 2 data sources that pass manual inspection
Richard Cyganiak: There are 2 data sources that pass manual inspection ←
15:19:23 <PhilA> cygri: there are two sources that pass the test suite which consists of the queries and the human inspection
Richard Cyganiak: there are two sources that pass the test suite which consists of the queries and the human inspection ←
15:21:17 <DaveReynolds> q+
Dave Reynolds: q+ ←
15:23:13 <PhilA> ack DaveReynolds
ack DaveReynolds ←
15:23:45 <PhilA> DaveReynolds: I am confused now
Dave Reynolds: I am confused now ←
15:24:46 <HadleyBeeman> PhilA: exit criteria: we will show that weher terms have been used, they have been used at least twice in line with the conformance criteria.
Phil Archer: exit criteria: we will show that weher terms have been used, they have been used at least twice in line with the conformance criteria. [ Scribe Assist by Hadley Beeman ] ←
15:24:57 <HadleyBeeman> … methodology is how we prove that
Hadley Beeman: … methodology is how we prove that ←
15:25:30 <sandro> PhilA: Exit Criteria: (1) We will show that our terms have been used in conformance with the spec, and (2) at least two datasets have used each term
Phil Archer: Exit Criteria: (1) We will show that our terms have been used in conformance with the spec, and (2) at least two datasets have used each term [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:29:31 <sandro> cygri: 1. We should show that every single term in the vocab has been used in at least two data sources. When doing this, we don't check if it's been used correctly.
Richard Cyganiak: 1. We should show that every single term in the vocab has been used in at least two data sources. When doing this, we don't check if it's been used correctly. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:30:46 <sandro> cygri: 2. We will have a set of SPARQL queries, and each query comes with a description of the expected results. Like: this is a list of all the orgs mentioned in your data. Implementors will run these SPARQL queries and see if the results seem to match the description. We want to have two publishers that pass all of these.
Richard Cyganiak: 2. We will have a set of SPARQL queries, and each query comes with a description of the expected results. Like: this is a list of all the orgs mentioned in your data. Implementors will run these SPARQL queries and see if the results seem to match the description. We want to have two publishers that pass all of these. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:31:15 <sandro> cygri: Where it's really the Implementors running the queries, and reporting back to use about whether the results look correct.
Richard Cyganiak: Where it's really the Implementors running the queries, and reporting back to use about whether the results look correct. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:32:38 <sandro> cygri: 3. We in the WG will prepare a checklist or script saying which things need to be checked. Implementors will look at their data to see if it meets those criteria. For example: none of the non-org term has the same semantics as an org term. We'll say "look at your data and check for this".
Richard Cyganiak: 3. We in the WG will prepare a checklist or script saying which things need to be checked. Implementors will look at their data to see if it meets those criteria. For example: none of the non-org term has the same semantics as an org term. We'll say "look at your data and check for this". [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:33:01 <sandro> HadleyBeeman: We need to define these test to go into CR.
Hadley Beeman: We need to define these test to go into CR. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:33:16 <sandro> cygri: Right, and we need two passing data sources.
Richard Cyganiak: Right, and we need two passing data sources. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:33:52 <sandro> cygri: I think these threee approaches, taken together, will give us an Implementation Report where it's not too much work on anybody, but we have confidence.
Richard Cyganiak: I think these threee approaches, taken together, will give us an Implementation Report where it's not too much work on anybody, but we have confidence. [ Scribe Assist by Sandro Hawke ] ←
15:33:56 <sandro> _+1
Sandro Hawke: _+1 ←
15:33:57 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
15:34:01 <DaveReynolds> +0
Dave Reynolds: +0 ←
15:34:03 <fadmaa> +1
Fadi Maali: +1 ←
15:34:26 <HadleyBeeman> PROPOSED: To adopt cygri's three points as above to be our exit criteria for the vocabularies
PROPOSED: To adopt cygri's three points as above to be our exit criteria for the vocabularies ←
15:34:31 <DeirdreLee> +1
Deirdre Lee: +1 ←
15:34:32 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
15:34:34 <BartvanLeeuwen> +1
Bart van Leeuwen: +1 ←
15:34:36 <DaveReynolds> +0
Dave Reynolds: +0 ←
15:34:36 <PhilA> +1
+1 ←
15:34:40 <fadmaa> +1
Fadi Maali: +1 ←
15:35:11 <HadleyBeeman> PROPOSED: To adopt these as our exit criteria for vocabularies:
PROPOSED: To adopt these as our exit criteria for vocabularies: ←
15:35:13 <HadleyBeeman> 1. We should show that every single term in the vocab has been used in at least two data sources. When doing this, we don't check if it's been used correctly.
Hadley Beeman: 1. We should show that every single term in the vocab has been used in at least two data sources. When doing this, we don't check if it's been used correctly. ←
15:35:40 <sandro> RRSAgent, pointer?
Sandro Hawke: RRSAgent, pointer? ←
15:35:40 <RRSAgent> See http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc#T15-35-40
RRSAgent IRC Bot: See http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc#T15-35-40 ←
15:36:48 <HadleyBeeman> PROPOSED: To adopt these three points (as described by cygri) as our exit criteria for vocabularies http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc#T15-35-40
PROPOSED: To adopt these three points (as described by cygri) as our exit criteria for vocabularies http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-irc#T15-35-40 ←
15:37:04 <DaveReynolds> +0
Dave Reynolds: +0 ←
15:37:07 <BartvanLeeuwen> +1
Bart van Leeuwen: +1 ←
15:37:12 <fadmaa> +1
Fadi Maali: +1 ←
15:37:13 <PhilA> +1
+1 ←
15:37:14 <bhyland> +1
Bernadette Hyland: +1 ←
15:37:15 <sandro> +1
Sandro Hawke: +1 ←
15:38:20 <DaveReynolds> +0 (seems confused, for some vocabs the SPARQL queries will be yes/no, the boundary between inspection of SPARQL results and inspection of data seems awkward)
Dave Reynolds: +0 (seems confused, for some vocabs the SPARQL queries will be yes/no, the boundary between inspection of SPARQL results and inspection of data seems awkward) ←
15:38:24 <PhilA> rrsagent, draft minutes
rrsagent, draft minutes ←
15:38:24 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA ←
15:38:52 <sandro> https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/gld/2013-04-12
Sandro Hawke: https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/gld/2013-04-12 ←
15:39:26 <HadleyBeeman> RESOLVED: To adopt these three points (as described by cygri) as our exit criteria for vocabularies https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/gld/2013-04-12#line0829
RESOLVED: To adopt these three points (as described by cygri) as our exit criteria for vocabularies https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/gld/2013-04-12#line0829 ←
15:39:37 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds: Overall seems to lead to an unconvincing result and a lot of work for the editors.
Dave Reynolds: Overall seems to lead to an unconvincing result and a lot of work for the editors. [ Scribe Assist by Dave Reynolds ] ←
15:39:41 <sandro> https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/gld/2013-04-12#resolution_2
Sandro Hawke: https://www.w3.org/2013/meeting/gld/2013-04-12#resolution_2 ←
15:39:53 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds: but current lack a better concrete proposal.
Dave Reynolds: but current lack a better concrete proposal. [ Scribe Assist by Dave Reynolds ] ←
15:40:13 <DaveReynolds> DaveReynolds: except that, as stated, QB will be different because of the existing IC tests and the need to test the normalization
Dave Reynolds: except that, as stated, QB will be different because of the existing IC tests and the need to test the normalization [ Scribe Assist by Dave Reynolds ] ←
15:40:28 <HadleyBeeman> http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations
Hadley Beeman: http://www.w3.org/2011/gld/wiki/ORG_CR_transition#Implementations ←
15:40:36 <cygri> DaveReynolds, I agree that QB should be different. Was really thinking about ORG here
Richard Cyganiak: DaveReynolds, I agree that QB should be different. Was really thinking about ORG here ←
15:41:26 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: declares topic closed!
Hadley Beeman: declares topic closed! ←
15:42:18 <PhilA> HadleyBeeman: I will create CR pages for the other Rec Track documents. It would be good if editors cold start to populate those pages
Hadley Beeman: I will create CR pages for the other Rec Track documents. It would be good if editors cold start to populate those pages ←
15:42:30 <PhilA> ... if you haven't updated the timetable page for your docs, please do
... if you haven't updated the timetable page for your docs, please do ←
15:42:34 <DaveReynolds> Timetable will need to further extended given above resolution :(
Dave Reynolds: Timetable will need to further extended given above resolution :( ←
15:42:35 <PhilA> ... and is that it?
... and is that it? ←
15:43:32 <PhilA> bhyland: Wraps up and thanks everyone for coming
Bernadette Hyland: Wraps up and thanks everyone for coming ←
15:43:43 <PhilA> bhyland: Thanks DeirdreLee for organising the hosting
Bernadette Hyland: Thanks DeirdreLee for organising the hosting ←
15:44:11 <DaveReynolds> Bye all
Dave Reynolds: Bye all ←
15:44:15 <PhilA> BartvanLeeuwen: I'd rather have 6 fires in a day - less exhausting than this
Bart van Leeuwen: I'd rather have 6 fires in a day - less exhausting than this ←
15:44:18 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←
15:44:27 <Zakim> -Sandro
Zakim IRC Bot: -Sandro ←
15:44:50 <Zakim> -GLDMeetingRoom
Scribe problem: the name 'GLDMeetingRoom' does not match any of the 72 active names. Either change the name used, or request the list of names be altered.Active names: Agis Papantoniou Aitor Moreno Anne Washington Asunción Gómez Pérez Bart van Leeuwen Bede McCall Benedikt Kaempgen Bernadette Hyland Biplav Srivastava Boris Villazón-Terrazas Caroline Burle Chris Beer Chris Musialek Christophe Gueret Cory Casanave Daniel Mekonnen Daniel Vila Dave Reynolds David Smith David Price Deirdre Lee Denise Warzel Dickson Lukose Elena Montiel Ponsoda Eric VonColln Eric Stephan Fadi Maali George Thomas Gerald Steeman Ghislain Atemezing Giancarlo Guizzardi Gofran Shukair Hadley Beeman Irene Polikoff James McKinney Jindřich Mynarz Joao Almeida John Goodwin John Sheridan John Erickson Jorge Gracia Luis Bermudez Lyle Burgoon Makx Dekkers Maria Fernandez Ruiz Marios Meimaris Martin Kaltenböck Martín Álvarez Michael Pendleton Mohamed ZERGAOUI Naomi Yoshizawa Phil Archer Pierre Andrews Raf Buyle Raj Singh Raphaël Troncy Richard Cyganiak Sandro Hawke Sarven Capadisli Serafin Olcoz Stasinos Konstantopoulos Ted Thibodeau Tina Gheen Tope Omitola William Brafford Yaso Córdova Yigal Arens Yosuke Funahashi Zachary Whitley Zakim IRC Bot Trackbot IRC Bot RRSAgent IRC Bot
Zakim IRC Bot: -GLDMeetingRoom ←
15:45:03 <PhilA> rrsagent, generate minutes
rrsagent, generate minutes ←
15:45:03 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA
RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/04/12-gld-minutes.html PhilA ←
15:52:57 <bhyland> Ping Sandro, would you put today's minutes through commonscribe?
(No events recorded for 7 minutes)
Bernadette Hyland: Ping Sandro, would you put today's minutes through commonscribe? ←
16:34:02 <PhilA> zakim, bye
(No events recorded for 41 minutes)
zakim, bye ←
16:34:02 <Zakim> leaving. As of this point the attendees were GLDMeetingRoom, Sandro, [IPcaller]
Zakim IRC Bot: leaving. As of this point the attendees were GLDMeetingRoom, Sandro, [IPcaller] ←
17:27:14 <cygri> ACTION: Richard to write up justification for no-change approach to ISSUE-64 (Dataset vs dataset vs hasDataset)
(No events recorded for 53 minutes)
ACTION: Richard to write up justification for no-change approach to ISSUE-64 (Dataset vs dataset vs hasDataset) ←
17:27:14 <trackbot> Created ACTION-119 - Write up justification for no-change approach to ISSUE-64 (Dataset vs dataset vs hasDataset) [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2013-04-19].
Trackbot IRC Bot: Created ACTION-119 - Write up justification for no-change approach to ISSUE-64 (Dataset vs dataset vs hasDataset) [on Richard Cyganiak - due 2013-04-19]. ←
Formatted by CommonScribe